Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35405570

RESUMO

Controlled-release tablets and rectal suppositories of sulfasalazine (SLF) and hydrocortisone 21-acetate (HA) were prepared as recommended dosage forms for the treatment of acute episodes of ulcerative colitis, in patients who do not respond to monotherapy. A High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) Diode-array method with a gradient elution mobile phase was developed to evaluate the production quality of both formulations (assay and dissolution profiles in gastric and intestinal fluids). Method's validation was carried out providing good linearity (r ≥ 0.9995), precision (RSD < 1.53%), recovery (96.9% - 103.7%) and limits of detection (LODSLF = 12 ng/mL, LODHA = 15 ng/mL). Experimental design and Plackett-Burman methodology was constructed to study the robustness of the analysis. In all composite substrates, a freezing lipid precipitation approach was used as purification step. The method was optimized by applying Central Composite design mode. The in-vitro/ex-vivo permeability studies of both formulations were evaluated by a Liquid Chromatography-Electron Spray Ionization Mass Spectrometry (LC-ESI/MS) +/- mode. The analysis of sulfamethazine (internal standard, SLM, m/z 279), HA (m/z 449, [M + HCOO]-), SLF (m/z 399) and its active metabolite mesalazine (MSL, m/z 154) was performed using a C18 column and gradient elution. The validation of the method met the requirements of the International Council for Harmonization (ICH) (r ≥ 0.9997, RSD ≤ 4.62%, Recovery > 95%, LODSLF = 1.28 ng/mL, LODHA = 1.07 ng/mL, LODMSL = 3.16 ng/mL). Based on the results, important conclusions were drawn concerning the role of excipients and SLF metabolism.


Assuntos
Mesalamina , Sulfassalazina , Cromatografia Líquida de Alta Pressão/métodos , Humanos , Hidrocortisona/análogos & derivados , Permeabilidade , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Supositórios , Comprimidos
3.
J Pain Res ; 4: 357-63, 2011.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22090804

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Pain related to ultraviolet B radiation (UVR) induced sunburn is an established, simple, acute pain model. One of the major criticisms is related to the potential dermal adverse events caused by the UVR exposure. This study tried to validate the model for oral and topical drugs and to define the minimum required UVR exposure. METHODS: This subject- and observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study evaluated 600 mg oral ibuprofen (IB) and topical hydrocortisone-21-acetate (HC) twice daily (bid) in 24 healthy volunteers. Treatment started immediately after irradiation and again at 12 hours, 24 hours, and 36 hours post-UVR. Assessment of hyperalgesia to heat and signs of inflammation (erythema, skin temperature) for all areas was performed after UVR and again at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours. Subjects returned within 4-11 days to the study site for the second period of the study. As in the first period, subjects received HC at one side and topical placebo on the other side, but oral treatment was crossed-over. RESULTS: The primary analysis failed to show the expected superiority of the IB-group vs the placebo group in period 1 of the study. Evaluating period 2 alone clearly showed the expected treatment effects of IB for erythema and heat pain threshold. The results were less pronounced for skin temperature. In contrast to IB vs oral placebo, there were no differences in treatment response between HC and topical placebo. UVR at all dosages induced profound erythema and reduction of heat pain threshold without causing blisters or other unexpected discomfort to the subjects. The changes were almost linear between 1 and 2 minimal erythema doses (MED), whereas the change from 2 to 3 MED was less pronounced. CONCLUSION: Use of 2 MED in upcoming studies seems to be reasonable to limit subjects' UVB exposure. The following procedural changes are suggested: Intensified training sessions before randomization to treatmentIncrease in sample size if they are crossover studiesSimplification in design (either oral or topical treatment).

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA