IN VITRO DISSOLUTION STUDY OF GLIMEPIRIDE FROM BINARY AND TERNARY SOLID DISPERSION FORMULATION

Abstract

Glimepiride (GMP) is poorly water soluble drug, so solubility is the main constraint for its oral bioavailability. Because, poor aqueous solubility and slow dissolution rate of the glimepiride lead to irreproducible clinical response or therapeutic failure in some cases due to sub therapeutic plasma drug levels. In this study, binary and ternary solid dispersion of glimepiride were prepared with polyethylene glycol 6000 (PEG 6000) and polyethylene glycol 4000 (PEG 4000) at different weight ratios using the solvent evaporation and melting method. It was found the drug was released 0.46% after 5 minutes and only 15.83% within 60 minutes from active glimepiride on the other hand the release pattern of glimepiride from the binary formulation containing PEG 4000 in 1:5 (Formulation coding: G5) showed the best result. It was found that the ternary different SD formulation containing(PEG4000:Glimepiride:Povidone) In ratio 1:1:0.25 (Formulation coding were : G13) showed the best result. The drug was changed to amorphous form after solid dispersion. Itwas also evident that solid dispersions improve solubility of drug particles thus enhancing dissolution characteristics of drugs they increase the oral bioavailability.
 Peer Review History: 
 UJPR follows the most transparent and toughest ‘Advanced OPEN peer review’ system. The identity of the authors and, reviewers will be known to each other. This transparent process will help to eradicate any possible malicious/purposeful interference by any person (publishing staff, reviewer, editor, author, etc) during peer review. As a result of this unique system, all reviewers will get their due recognition and respect, once their names are published in the papers. We expect that, by publishing peer review reports with published papers, will be helpful to many authors for drafting their article according to the specifications. Auhors will remove any error of their article and they will improve their article(s) according to the previous reports displayed with published article(s). The main purpose of it is ‘to improve the quality of a candidate manuscript’. Our reviewers check the ‘strength and weakness of a manuscript honestly’. There will increase in the perfection, and transparency.
 Received file 
 
 Average Peer review marks at initial stage: 4.5/10
 Average Peer review marks at publication stage: 7.5/10
 Reviewer(s) detail:
 Name: Dr. Mohammed Abdel-Wahab Sayed Abourehab 
 Affiliation: Umm Al-Qura University; Makkah Al-Mukarramah, Saudi Arabia
 E-mail: maabourehab@uqu.edu.sa
 
 Name: Dr. Evren Alğin Yapar
 Affiliation: Turkish Medicines and Medical Devices Agency, Turkiye
 E-mail: evren.yapar@yahoo.com
 Comments of reviewer(s):