Inhalable dry powders of rifampicin highlighting potential and drawbacks in formulation development for experimental tuberculosis aerosol therapy.
Clicks: 333
ID: 91122
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
78.8
/100
333 views
229 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #8 of 8 articles by views in expert opinion on drug delivery
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
: Recently, tuberculosis was reported as the leading cause of death from a single infectious agent. Standard therapy includes administration of four first-line antibiotics, i.e. rifampicin, isoniazid, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide over a period of at least 26 weeks, which in case of rifampicin oftentimes is accompanied by unwanted side effects and variable bioavailability that compromise a positive therapeutic outcome. As the main site of infection is the lungs, it is desirable to develop a therapeutic formulation to be administered via the pulmonary route.: This work presents a literature review on studies investigating inhalable dry powder formulations including rifampicin in the context of an experimental tuberculosis therapy, with a special focus on aerosol performance.: It was found that formulation approaches involving different strategies and functional excipients are under investigation but as of now, no formulation has managed to leap into commercial clinical testing. Reasons for this might not primarily be associated with a lack of suitable candidates, but amongst others a lack of suitable models to assess the efficacy, therapeutic benefit, and cost-effectiveness of the candidate formulations.
| Reference Key |
berkenfeld2020inhalableexpert
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Berkenfeld, Kai;McConville, Jason T;Lamprecht, Alf; |
| Journal | expert opinion on drug delivery |
| Year | 2020 |
| DOI |
10.1080/17425247.2020.1720644
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.