ArticlePloS one2025
Development and characterisation of fast dispersible dimenhydrinate tablets: Compactional study and in-silico PBPK modeling.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to optimize and evaluate dimenhydrinate fast dispersible tablets (50 mg) by utilizing cost effective direct compression method. A total of nine formulations (F1-F9) were designed and developed by central composite rotatable design using design expert® software (version 11.0, Stat-Ease Inc.,) to study the impact of avicel PH102 (15-55%) and sodium starch glycolate (2-8%) on responses, i.e., hardness (R1), disintegration time (R2) and % drug release (R3). Powder blends of all formulations showed good flow behavior. Post compressional studies were conducted to assess the quality attributes of the compressed formulations. Formulation F2 was found to be optimized with good mechanical strength, i.e., hardness 4.2 kg, friability 0.77%, disintegration time 19 secs and % drug release 100.01% at 15 minutes. Compressional behavior of optimized formulation was determined with the help of Heckle plot. The PY (yield value) and the tensile strength of the optimized formulation (F2) were found to be 66.66 MN/m2 and 1.093 ± 1.66 to 1.642 ± 1.76 MN/m2 respectively. Differential scanning calorimetric and scanning electron microscopy analysis were performed to explore compatibility between ingredients and morphological features. All formulations followed weibull model in four different dissolution media. All the formulations were found to be stable at accelerated conditions. The in-silico GastroPlus™ PBPK modeling was also carried out to determine the pharmacokinetic parameters of the optimized formulation (F2) as an alternative to in vivo dimenhydrinate studies. Simulated PK values of F2 were found to be 143.16 ng/ml (Cmax), 2 h (Tmax), 2533.8 ng-h/ml (AUC 0-inf) and 1477.9 ng-h/ml (AUC 0-t). Results indicated that the fold error value was > 2 which indicated that experimental values are comparable with the predicted values. This type of study will be helpful for pharmaceutical manufacturers to produce patient compliance, low-cost tablet dosage form.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.