Figures & data
TABLE 1 Approached solubility of griseofulvin in different oil phases
TABLE 2 Composition of the investigated unloaded emulsions
TABLE 3 Compositions (w/w %) of the emulsions incorporating the model drug at two griseofulvin concentrations
FIG. 1 Particle size distribution of freshly prepared (a) negatively, (b) positively, and (c) neutrally charged SE. Results are mean ± SD error bar of three determinations.
TABLE 4 Characteristics at day 0 of griseofulvin loaded and unloaded submicron emulsion
FIG. 2 TEM structure of the droplets of loaded (a) negatively, (b) positively, and (c) neutrally charged submicron emulsions.
FIG. 3 Griseofulvin plasma level concentration after intra-aortic administration of griseofulvin (n = 6). Results are mean ± SEM error bar.
FIG. 4 Griseofulvin plasma level concentration after oral administration of positively charged SE (♦, n = 5), negatively charged SE (▵, n = 6), neutrally charged SE (▪, n = 5), and tablet (□, n = 5). SE: submicron emulsion. Results are mean ± SEM error bar.
TABLE 5 Pharmacokinetic parameters of oral formulations
FIG. 5 Median cumulative percent dose absorbed versus time plot (a) and mean input absorption rate (b) extracted using deconvolution analysis for positively charged SE (♦, n = 5), negatively charged SE (▵, n = 6), neutrally charged SE (▪, n = 5), and tablet (□, n = 5). SE: submicron emulsion.
TABLE 6 Drug disposition profiles comparison (similarity test)
TABLE 7 Absorption parameters of oral formulations