Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

In vitro dissolution characteristics of patent, generic and similar brands of naproxen in various dissolution media

Maria F Rocha-Alcaraz1, Erandis D Torres-Sánchez1, Juan H Torres-Jasso2, Alán Y Yáñez-González1, Mireya Z Reyna-Villela3, Daniel Rojas-Bravo3, Joel Salazar-Flores1

1Department of Medical Sciences and Life, Cu-Ciénega; 2Department of Biological Sciences, Division of Biological and Health Sciences, Cu-Coast; 3Department of Technological Cu-Ciénega, University of Guadalajara, Jalisco, México.

For correspondence:-  Joel Salazar-Flores   Email: joelos12@hotmail.com   Tel:+523929257112

Accepted: 24 May 201        Published: 30 June 2019

Citation: Rocha-Alcaraz MF, Torres-Sánchez ED, Torres-Jasso JH, Yáñez-González AY, Reyna-Villela MZ, Rojas-Bravo D, et al. In vitro dissolution characteristics of patent, generic and similar brands of naproxen in various dissolution media. Trop J Pharm Res 2019; 18(6):1155-1160 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v18i6.1

© 2019 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the dissolution properties of various brands of naproxen in four dissolution media in order to forecast their biological availability.
Methods: Dissolution tests were carried out in a dissolution tester with 48 tablets of different naproxen brands in 900 mL of 0.1 M phosphate buffer, pH 7.4. Subsequently, the medium was modified with 600 mL of buffer plus 300 mL of cola drink, grapefruit or milk. Each sample was taken and brought to a concentration approximating that of a reference solution. Absorbance at 332 nm was determined and the dissolution, Q, was calculated (Q values ≥ 80.0 ± 5 % were acceptable).
Results: The dissolution in buffer, cola drink and grapefruit juice was > 85 %, < 80 %, and 7 - 68 %, respectively. Using 2-way ANOVA, these media and the three naproxen brands showed significant differences (F = 68.90, p < 0.001; F = 23.18, p < 0.001). With Fisher's LSD test, two of these media contributed consistently to dissolution, and the three drug brands showed statistically different dissolution profiles (p ≤ 0.05).
Conclusion: Caution must be exercised cola drink, grapefruit juice and milk are used to administered naproxen as the biological availability of the drug may be altered.

Keywords: Naproxen brands, Dissolution, Phosphate buffer, Grapefruit, Cola drink, Milk

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.6 (2023)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 49 (2023)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates