The Experts below are selected from a list of 16554 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Dave Wallick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Reviewing the use of ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose in microencapsulation. Part 3: Applications for microcapsules.
    Drug development and industrial pharmacy, 2011
    Co-Authors: True L. Rogers, Dave Wallick
    Abstract:

    This three-part review has been developed following the evaluation of literature where ethylcellulose, methylcellulose, or hypromellose was used to make microcapsules. Parts 1 and 2 of the review are published in separate papers. Part 1 covers the various materials used to formulate microcapsules, and Part 2 covers the various techniques used to make microcapsules. In the current paper, Part 3 covers the end-use applications for which microcapsules are used. Examples of applications to be covered include modified release, improved efficacy and safety, multiparticulate compression, improved processability and stability, and taste- and odor-masking. It is hoped that formulators can use Part 3 to understand the various end-use applications of microcapsules made from these encapsulating polymers. SciFinder was utilized to perform the literature search. SciFinder leverages literature databases, such as Chemical Abstracts Service Registry and Medline. A total of 379 references were identified during the review....

  • Reviewing the use of ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose in microencapsulation. Part 1: materials used to formulate microcapsules
    Drug development and industrial pharmacy, 2011
    Co-Authors: True L. Rogers, Dave Wallick
    Abstract:

    This review highlights references where ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose were used to make microcapsules. The review has been divided into three parts. This first part discusses various materials used to formulate microcapsules, such as the three encapsulating polymers as well as protective colloids, plasticizers and surfactants. The second part covers the various techniques used to make microcapsules, such as temperature-induced phase separation, emulsion solvent evaporation, solvent evaporation, film coating, and others. The third part covers the various applications for which microcapsules are used, such as modified release, improved efficacy and safety, taste- and odor-masking, and others. It is hoped that formulators can use Part 1 as a guide to the literature documenting formulation of microcapsules made from these encapsulating polymers. SciFinder was utilized to identify the pertinent literature. SciFinder leverages literature databases, such as Chemical Abstracts Service Registry ...

  • Reviewing the use of ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose in microencapsulation. Part 2: Techniques used to make microcapsules
    Drug development and industrial pharmacy, 2011
    Co-Authors: True L. Rogers, Dave Wallick
    Abstract:

    This three-part review has been developed following the evaluation of literature where ethylcellulose, methylcellulose or hypromellose was used to make microcapsules. Parts 1 and 3 of the review are published as separate papers. Part 1 covers the various materials used to formulate microcapsules, and Part 3 covers the various end-use applications for microcapsules. In the current paper, Part 2 covers the techniques used to make microcapsules. Examples of techniques to be covered include temperature-induced phase separation, emulsion solvent evaporation, solvent evaporation, film coating, nonsolvent addition and spray drying. It is hoped that formulators can use Part 2 to understand how to formulate microcapsules using these encapsulating polymers.SciFinder was utilized to perform the literature search. SciFinder leverages literature databases, such as Chemical Abstracts Service Registry and Medline. A total of 379 references were identified during the review. The need for a three-part review reflects the ...

True L. Rogers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Reviewing the use of ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose in microencapsulation. Part 3: Applications for microcapsules.
    Drug development and industrial pharmacy, 2011
    Co-Authors: True L. Rogers, Dave Wallick
    Abstract:

    This three-part review has been developed following the evaluation of literature where ethylcellulose, methylcellulose, or hypromellose was used to make microcapsules. Parts 1 and 2 of the review are published in separate papers. Part 1 covers the various materials used to formulate microcapsules, and Part 2 covers the various techniques used to make microcapsules. In the current paper, Part 3 covers the end-use applications for which microcapsules are used. Examples of applications to be covered include modified release, improved efficacy and safety, multiparticulate compression, improved processability and stability, and taste- and odor-masking. It is hoped that formulators can use Part 3 to understand the various end-use applications of microcapsules made from these encapsulating polymers. SciFinder was utilized to perform the literature search. SciFinder leverages literature databases, such as Chemical Abstracts Service Registry and Medline. A total of 379 references were identified during the review....

  • Reviewing the use of ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose in microencapsulation. Part 1: materials used to formulate microcapsules
    Drug development and industrial pharmacy, 2011
    Co-Authors: True L. Rogers, Dave Wallick
    Abstract:

    This review highlights references where ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose were used to make microcapsules. The review has been divided into three parts. This first part discusses various materials used to formulate microcapsules, such as the three encapsulating polymers as well as protective colloids, plasticizers and surfactants. The second part covers the various techniques used to make microcapsules, such as temperature-induced phase separation, emulsion solvent evaporation, solvent evaporation, film coating, and others. The third part covers the various applications for which microcapsules are used, such as modified release, improved efficacy and safety, taste- and odor-masking, and others. It is hoped that formulators can use Part 1 as a guide to the literature documenting formulation of microcapsules made from these encapsulating polymers. SciFinder was utilized to identify the pertinent literature. SciFinder leverages literature databases, such as Chemical Abstracts Service Registry ...

  • Reviewing the use of ethylcellulose, methylcellulose and hypromellose in microencapsulation. Part 2: Techniques used to make microcapsules
    Drug development and industrial pharmacy, 2011
    Co-Authors: True L. Rogers, Dave Wallick
    Abstract:

    This three-part review has been developed following the evaluation of literature where ethylcellulose, methylcellulose or hypromellose was used to make microcapsules. Parts 1 and 3 of the review are published as separate papers. Part 1 covers the various materials used to formulate microcapsules, and Part 3 covers the various end-use applications for microcapsules. In the current paper, Part 2 covers the techniques used to make microcapsules. Examples of techniques to be covered include temperature-induced phase separation, emulsion solvent evaporation, solvent evaporation, film coating, nonsolvent addition and spray drying. It is hoped that formulators can use Part 2 to understand how to formulate microcapsules using these encapsulating polymers.SciFinder was utilized to perform the literature search. SciFinder leverages literature databases, such as Chemical Abstracts Service Registry and Medline. A total of 379 references were identified during the review. The need for a three-part review reflects the ...

Bangning Zhang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • a systematic assessment of carcinogenicity of chemicals in hydraulic fracturing fluids and flowback water
    Environmental Pollution, 2019
    Co-Authors: Xiao Zhang, Genny Carrillo, Yan Zhong, Haidong Kan, Bangning Zhang
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background Thousands of chemicals exist in hydraulic-fracturing (HF) fluids and wastewater from unconventional oil gas development. The carcinogenicity of these chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater has never been systematically evaluated. Objectives In this study, we assessed the carcinogenicity of 1,173 HF-related chemicals in the HF chemical data from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Methods We linked the HF chemical data with the agent classification data from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at the World Health Organization (WHO) (N = 998 chemicals) to evaluate human carcinogenic risk of the chemicals and with the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB) from Toxnet (N = 1,534 chemicals) to evaluate potential carcinogenicity of the chemicals. Results The Chemical Abstract Service Registry Numbers (CASRNs) for chemicals were used for data linkage. Among 1,173 chemicals, 1,039 were identified only in HF fluids, 97 only in wastewater, and 37 in both. Compared with IARC, we found information of 104 chemicals, and 48 of them may have potentially carcinogenic risk to human, among which 14 are definitely carcinogenic, 7 probably carcinogenic, and 27 possibly carcinogenic. Using the CPDB data, it suggests that 66 chemicals are potentially carcinogenic based on rats and mouse models. Conclusions Conclusions Our evaluation suggests that exposure to some chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater may increase cancer risk, and the identified chemicals could be selected as the priority list for drinking water exposure assessment or cancer-related health studies.

  • a systematic assessment of carcinogenicity of chemicals in hydraulic fracturing fluids and flowback water
    Environmental Pollution, 2019
    Co-Authors: Xiaohui Xu, Xiao Zhang, Genny Carrillo, Yan Zhong, Bangning Zhang
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background Thousands of chemicals exist in hydraulic-fracturing (HF) fluids and wastewater from unconventional oil gas development. The carcinogenicity of these chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater has never been systematically evaluated. Objectives In this study, we assessed the carcinogenicity of 1,173 HF-related chemicals in the HF chemical data from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Methods We linked the HF chemical data with the agent classification data from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at the World Health Organization (WHO) (N = 998 chemicals) to evaluate human carcinogenic risk of the chemicals and with the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB) from Toxnet (N = 1,534 chemicals) to evaluate potential carcinogenicity of the chemicals. Results The Chemical Abstract Service Registry Numbers (CASRNs) for chemicals were used for data linkage. Among 1,173 chemicals, 1,039 were identified only in HF fluids, 97 only in wastewater, and 37 in both. Compared with IARC, we found information of 104 chemicals, and 48 of them may have potentially carcinogenic risk to human, among which 14 are definitely carcinogenic, 7 probably carcinogenic, and 27 possibly carcinogenic. Using the CPDB data, it suggests that 66 chemicals are potentially carcinogenic based on rats and mouse models. Conclusions Conclusions Our evaluation suggests that exposure to some chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater may increase cancer risk, and the identified chemicals could be selected as the priority list for drinking water exposure assessment or cancer-related health studies.

Xiao Zhang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • a systematic assessment of carcinogenicity of chemicals in hydraulic fracturing fluids and flowback water
    Environmental Pollution, 2019
    Co-Authors: Xiao Zhang, Genny Carrillo, Yan Zhong, Haidong Kan, Bangning Zhang
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background Thousands of chemicals exist in hydraulic-fracturing (HF) fluids and wastewater from unconventional oil gas development. The carcinogenicity of these chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater has never been systematically evaluated. Objectives In this study, we assessed the carcinogenicity of 1,173 HF-related chemicals in the HF chemical data from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Methods We linked the HF chemical data with the agent classification data from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at the World Health Organization (WHO) (N = 998 chemicals) to evaluate human carcinogenic risk of the chemicals and with the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB) from Toxnet (N = 1,534 chemicals) to evaluate potential carcinogenicity of the chemicals. Results The Chemical Abstract Service Registry Numbers (CASRNs) for chemicals were used for data linkage. Among 1,173 chemicals, 1,039 were identified only in HF fluids, 97 only in wastewater, and 37 in both. Compared with IARC, we found information of 104 chemicals, and 48 of them may have potentially carcinogenic risk to human, among which 14 are definitely carcinogenic, 7 probably carcinogenic, and 27 possibly carcinogenic. Using the CPDB data, it suggests that 66 chemicals are potentially carcinogenic based on rats and mouse models. Conclusions Conclusions Our evaluation suggests that exposure to some chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater may increase cancer risk, and the identified chemicals could be selected as the priority list for drinking water exposure assessment or cancer-related health studies.

  • a systematic assessment of carcinogenicity of chemicals in hydraulic fracturing fluids and flowback water
    Environmental Pollution, 2019
    Co-Authors: Xiaohui Xu, Xiao Zhang, Genny Carrillo, Yan Zhong, Bangning Zhang
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background Thousands of chemicals exist in hydraulic-fracturing (HF) fluids and wastewater from unconventional oil gas development. The carcinogenicity of these chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater has never been systematically evaluated. Objectives In this study, we assessed the carcinogenicity of 1,173 HF-related chemicals in the HF chemical data from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Methods We linked the HF chemical data with the agent classification data from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at the World Health Organization (WHO) (N = 998 chemicals) to evaluate human carcinogenic risk of the chemicals and with the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB) from Toxnet (N = 1,534 chemicals) to evaluate potential carcinogenicity of the chemicals. Results The Chemical Abstract Service Registry Numbers (CASRNs) for chemicals were used for data linkage. Among 1,173 chemicals, 1,039 were identified only in HF fluids, 97 only in wastewater, and 37 in both. Compared with IARC, we found information of 104 chemicals, and 48 of them may have potentially carcinogenic risk to human, among which 14 are definitely carcinogenic, 7 probably carcinogenic, and 27 possibly carcinogenic. Using the CPDB data, it suggests that 66 chemicals are potentially carcinogenic based on rats and mouse models. Conclusions Conclusions Our evaluation suggests that exposure to some chemicals in HF fluids and wastewater may increase cancer risk, and the identified chemicals could be selected as the priority list for drinking water exposure assessment or cancer-related health studies.

Stefan P J Van Leeuwen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment terminology classification and origins
    Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2011
    Co-Authors: Robert C Buck, Scott A. Mabury, Ian T Cousins, Allan Astrup Jensen, James Franklin, Urs Berger, Jason M Conder, Pim De Voogt, Kurunthachalam Kannan, Stefan P J Van Leeuwen
    Abstract:

    The primary aim of this article is to provide an overview of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) detected in the environment, wildlife, and humans, and recommend clear, specific, and descriptive terminology, names, and acronyms for PFASs. The overarching objective is to unify and harmonize communication on PFASs by offering terminology for use by the global scientific, regulatory, and industrial communities. A particular emphasis is placed on long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids, substances related to the long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids, and substances intended as alternatives to the use of the long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids or their precursors. First, we define PFASs, classify them into various families, and recommend a pragmatic set of common names and acronyms for both the families and their individual members. Terminology related to fluorinated polymers is an important aspect of our classification. Second, we provide a brief description of the 2 main production processes, electrochemical fluorination and telomerization, used for introducing perfluoroalkyl moieties into organic compounds, and we specify the types of byproducts (isomers and homologues) likely to arise in these processes. Third, we show how the principal families of PFASs are interrelated as industrial, environmental, or metabolic precursors or transformation products of one another. We pay particular attention to those PFASs that have the potential to be converted, by abiotic or biotic environmental processes or by human metabolism, into long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylic or sulfonic acids, which are currently the focus of regulatory action. The Supplemental Data lists 42 families and subfamilies of PFASs and 268 selected individual compounds, providing recommended names and acronyms, and structural formulas, as well as Chemical Abstracts Service Registry numbers. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2011;7:513–541. © 2011 SETAC