In vitro comparative quality evaluation of different brands of Amlodipine Tablets Commercially available in Jimma Town, South-western Ethiopia DOI Creative Commons

Abera Milkesa,

Gemmechu Hasen,

Tesfaye Mohammed

et al.

PLoS ONE, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 19(11), P. e0310828 - e0310828

Published: Nov. 19, 2024

Background The incidence of hypertension in persons 25 years age and older is estimated to be 46% Africa, where it still very common. This concerning rate could explained by the pharmaceutical markets’ accessibility poor quality antihypertensive drugs. Thus, purpose this study was evaluate compare different brands Amlodipine Tablets Commercially available Jimma Town, South-western Ethiopia. Methods control test conducted from August 30, 2019 February 27, 2020 at University Laboratory Drug Quality Control (JuLaDQ). laboratory carried out accordance with WHO inspection guidelines United States Pharmacopeia. A statistically significant considered when P<0.05. For further comparison in-vitro dissolution profiles amlodipine tablets, model-independent model-dependent parameters statistical Dunnetts tests for ensuring bioequivalence were used profiles. Results With exception brand AMD-5 (1/10), remaining nine (n = 9) within visual criteria. such as friability, weight variation, identity, assay, model independent (f1, f2) confirmed that, all generic products bio-equivalence, interchangeable comparator product. dependent approaches revealed Weibull (AMD-10), Zero order (AMD-3), Korsemeyer-Peppas models most effective predictions release substance dosage form. (r2 ≥0.9695) best descriptive determining drug kinetics point view examined. evaluated tablets line standards. methods that clinical practice. tested follow more than two kinetics. Conclusion a manifest discrepancy profiles’ releases. Therefore, strongly advised use appropriately designed profile evaluation various pH values media, well do comprehensive inspections. will make easier thorough investigation any potential issues might related market.

Language: Английский

CKD screening for better kidney health: Why? Who? How? When? DOI Open Access
Katherine R. Tuttle

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 39(10), P. 1537 - 1539

Published: Feb. 28, 2024

Language: Английский

Citations

6
Acknowledgment analysis: insight into biopharmaceutical company-funded papers and patents DOI
Xinyuan Zhang, Qing Xie

Scientometrics, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Feb. 16, 2025

Language: Английский

Citations

0
International coverage of GLP-1 receptor agonists: a review and ethical analysis of discordant approaches DOI
Johan Dellgren, Govind Persad,

Ezekiel J. Emanuel

et al.

The Lancet, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 404(10455), P. 902 - 906

Published: Aug. 1, 2024

Language: Английский

Citations

1
In vitro comparative quality evaluation of different brands of Amlodipine Tablets Commercially available in Jimma Town, South-western Ethiopia DOI Creative Commons

Abera Milkesa,

Gemmechu Hasen,

Tesfaye Mohammed

et al.

PLoS ONE, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 19(11), P. e0310828 - e0310828

Published: Nov. 19, 2024

Background The incidence of hypertension in persons 25 years age and older is estimated to be 46% Africa, where it still very common. This concerning rate could explained by the pharmaceutical markets’ accessibility poor quality antihypertensive drugs. Thus, purpose this study was evaluate compare different brands Amlodipine Tablets Commercially available Jimma Town, South-western Ethiopia. Methods control test conducted from August 30, 2019 February 27, 2020 at University Laboratory Drug Quality Control (JuLaDQ). laboratory carried out accordance with WHO inspection guidelines United States Pharmacopeia. A statistically significant considered when P<0.05. For further comparison in-vitro dissolution profiles amlodipine tablets, model-independent model-dependent parameters statistical Dunnetts tests for ensuring bioequivalence were used profiles. Results With exception brand AMD-5 (1/10), remaining nine (n = 9) within visual criteria. such as friability, weight variation, identity, assay, model independent (f1, f2) confirmed that, all generic products bio-equivalence, interchangeable comparator product. dependent approaches revealed Weibull (AMD-10), Zero order (AMD-3), Korsemeyer-Peppas models most effective predictions release substance dosage form. (r2 ≥0.9695) best descriptive determining drug kinetics point view examined. evaluated tablets line standards. methods that clinical practice. tested follow more than two kinetics. Conclusion a manifest discrepancy profiles’ releases. Therefore, strongly advised use appropriately designed profile evaluation various pH values media, well do comprehensive inspections. will make easier thorough investigation any potential issues might related market.

Language: Английский

Citations

0