PDF
Full
Outline
This experiment aims to study the taste-masking effects of different kinds of corrigent used individually and in combination on ibuprofen oral solution, in order to optimize the taste-masking formulation. Firstly, a wide range of corrigent and the mass fractions were extensively screened using electronic tongue technology. Subsequently, a combination of sensory evaluation, analytic hierarchy process (AHP)-fuzzy mathematics evaluation, and Box-Behnken experimental design were employed to comprehensively assess the taste-masking effects of different combinations of corrigent on ibuprofen oral solution, optimize the taste-masking formulation, and validate the results. The study received ethical approval from the Review Committee of the Beijing University of Chinese Medicine (ethical code: 2024BZYLL0102). The results showed that corrigent fractions and types were screened separately through single-factor experiments. Subsequently, a Box-Behnken response surface design combined with AHP and fuzzy mathematics evaluation was used to fit a functional model: Z = 688.310 11 - 3 023.722 22X1 - 11.477 00X2 + 62.721 67X3 + 14.600 00X1X2 - 179.666 67X1X3 - 3.152 00X2X3 + 4 031.111 11X12 + 0.525 28X22 + 9.772 00X32. This model is stable and reliable, determining the optimal taste-masking formulation to be 3.9 g·L-1 of stevioside, 100 g L-1 of xylitol, and 30 g L-1 of methyl-β-cyclodextrin. The comprehensive score of the verification test is 88.14, with a relative RSD of 0.39%, indicating the feasibility of this model. This study achieved the improvement of the taste of ibuprofen oral solution through a combination of objective and subjective methods. Three types of corrigent were identified for enhancing drug taste, leading to the selection of the optimal taste-masking formulation for ibuprofen oral solution. This significantly enhanced the taste of the original formulation, improved patient compliance, and offered a new approach to mitigating the undesirable taste of formulations.
PDF
153
61
| 科 Family | 属数 Number of genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) | 属 Genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae | 2 | 11 | 5.26 | 鹅膏菌属 Amanita | 10 | 4.78 |
| 小菇科 Mycenaceae | 2 | 12 | 5.74 | 丝盖伞属 Inocybe | 5 | 2.39 |
| 多孔菌科 Polyporaceae | 8 | 14 | 6.70 | 蜡蘑属 Laccaria | 5 | 2.39 |
| 红菇科 Russulaceae | 3 | 23 | 11.00 | 小皮伞属 Marasmius | 6 | 2.87 |
| 小菇属 Mycena | 11 | 5.26 | ||||
| 光柄菇属 Pluteus | 5 | 2.39 | ||||
| 红菇属 Russula | 17 | 8.13 | ||||
| 栓菌属 Trametes | 5 | 2.39 |
关闭全屏
No. 86 Xueyuan South Road, Haidian District, Beijing
010-62199257
qkjq@cast.org.cn
Copyright © 2025 China Association for Science and Technology. All rights reserved. For all open access content, the relevant licensing terms apply.
Sponsored by the Office of the Leading Group for Cybersecurity and Informatization of CAST, and supported by Science and Technology Review Publishing House
