ArticlePharmaceutical research2025
Dissolution Profiles Comparison Using Various Model Independent Statistical Approaches: Can We Increase Chance of Similarity?
Article in Pharmaceutical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Post-market surveillance of albendazole tablet brands in Kenya: Implications for deworming programs and clinical outcomes.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Exploring Additional Strength Biowaiver Perspectives in the ICH M13B Framework for Immediate Release Solid Oral Dosage Forms: Opportunities & Challenges.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn vitro dissolution testing is a critical quality attribute for solid dosage forms. Apart from similarity factor (f2), other alternatives namely model independent and dependent methods are suggested by regulatory agencies. Current manuscript attempts to compare various model independent approaches on dissolution similarity.
methodsDissolution data with various degrees of variability (10-20%, 40-50%, 70-80%) are compared using similarity factor f2 (estimated, expected, bias corrected with percentile & BCa intervals) and novel approaches such as EDNE, SE, T2EQ, and MSD. Further, a flow chart is proposed to assist selection of suitable methodology.
resultsThe expected f2 was stringent as compared to other f2 types and the Bca confidence intervals approach increased chance of acceptance as compared to conventional f2 bootstrap. Further, EDNE results synchronized with f2 analysis. Outcome from SE, T2EQ approaches depends on value of equivalence margin. MSD approach was most stringent as compared to others. Finally, a decision tree has been proposed to facilitate the selection of appropriate methodology for similarity analysis with consideration of regulatory perspectives.
conclusionsOverall, various model independent approaches are compared for dissolution similarity analysis. This comprehensive guidance will assist formulation and biopharmaceutics scientists to enhance the success rate of similarity while ensuring regulatory compliance and thus helps to achieve drug product with consistent performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40679781What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.