Background: About two-third of new drugs reveal low solubility in water due to which it becomes difficult for formulation scientists to develop oral solid dosage forms with a pharmaceutically acceptable range of therapeutic activity. In such cases, S-SMEEDS are the best carriers used universally for the delivery of hydrophobic drugs. SEDDS are also used but due to their limitations, SSMEDDS are used widely. These are the isotropic mixtures of oils, co-solvents, and surfactants. SSMEDDS are physically stable, easy to manufacture, easy to fill in gelatin capsules as well as improve the drug bioavailability by releasing the drug in the emulsion form into the gastrointestinal tract and enable smooth absorption of the drug through the intestinal lymphatic pathway.

Methods: We conducted a literature search related to our review, also employing the peer-reviewed research, and provided a conceptual framework. Standard tools were used for drawing the figures of the paper, and various search engines were used for literature exploration. In this review article, the author has discussed the importance of S-SMEDDS, selection criteria for excipients, pseudo-ternary diagram, mechanism of action of S-SMEDDS, solidification techniques used for S-SMEDDS, Characterization of SEDDS and S-SMEDDS including Stability Evaluation of both and future prospects have been concluded through recent findings on S-SMEDDS in Cancer as well as a neoteric patent on S-SMEDDS.

Results: Many research papers have been discussed in this review article, from which it was found that the ternary phase diagram is the most crucial part for developing the SMEDDS. From the various research findings, it was found that the excipient selection is the essential step which decides the strong therapeutic effect of the formulation. The significant outcome related to solid-SMEDDS is the less the globule size, the higher would be the bioavailability. The method in which adsorption of a solid carrier takes place is most widely used for the preparation of solid-SMEDDS. After reviewing many patents, it was observed that the solid-SMEDDS have a strong potential for targeting and treating different types of cancer due to their properties to enhance permeation and increase bioavailability.

Conclusion: S-SMEEDS are more acceptable pharmaceutically as compared to SEDDS due to their various advantages over SEDDS, such as stability issue is prevalent with SEDDS. A number of patent researchers have formulated S-SMEDDS of poorly soluble drugs and found S-SMEDDS as prospective for the delivery of hydrophobic drugs in the treatment of cancer. S-SMEEDS are increasingly grabbing attention, and the patentability on S-SMEDDS is unavoidable, which proves that S-SMEEDS are widely accepted carriers. These are used universally for the delivery of hydrophilic drugs and anticancer drugs as they release the drug to the gastrointestinal tract and enhance the systemic absorption.

背景：大约三分之二的新药在水中的溶解度较低，因此配方科学家很难开发出具有药学可接受范围的治疗活性的口服固体剂型。在这种情况下，S-SMEEDS 是普遍用于输送疏水性药物的最佳载体。SEDDS 也被使用，但由于其局限性，SSMEDDS 被广泛使用。这些是油、共溶剂和表面活性剂的各向同性混合物。SSMEDDS 物理稳定，易于制造，易于填充明胶胶囊，并通过将乳剂形式的药物释放到胃肠道中来提高药物的生物利用度，并使药物通过肠道淋巴途径顺利吸收。

方法：我们进行了与我们的评论相关的文献检索，也采用了同行评议的研究，并提供了一个概念框架。使用标准工具绘制论文图形，并使用各种搜索引擎进行文献探索。在这篇综述文章中，作者讨论了 S-SMEDDS 的重要性、赋形剂的选择标准、伪三元图、S-SMEDDS 的作用机制、用于 S-SMEDDS 的固化技术、SEDDS 和 S-SMEDDS 的表征，包括通过最近关于 S-SMEDDS 在癌症中的发现以及 S-SMEDDS 的一项新专利，已经得出了对两者和未来前景的稳定性评估。

结果：这篇综述文章讨论了许多研究论文，从中发现三元相图是开发 SMEDDS 最关键的部分。从各种研究结果中发现，赋形剂的选择是决定制剂强效治疗效果的关键步骤。与固体 SMEDDS 相关的重要结果是小球尺寸越小，生物利用度越高。固体载体发生吸附的方法最广泛用于制备固体-SMEDDS。在审查了许多专利后，观察到固体 SMEDDS 具有很强的靶向和治疗不同类型癌症的潜力，因为它们具有增强渗透和增加生物利用度的特性。

结论：与 SEDDS 相比，S-SMEEDS 在药学上更容易被接受，因为它们比 SEDDS 具有多种优势，例如 SEDDS 普遍存在稳定性问题。许多专利研究人员制定了难溶性药物的 S-SMEDDS，并发现 S-SMEDDS 有望用于在癌症治疗中递送疏水性药物。S-SMEEDS越来越受到关注，S-SMEEDS的可专利性在所难免，证明S-SMEEDS是被广泛接受的载体。它们普遍用于递送亲水性药物和抗癌药物，因为它们将药物释放到胃肠道并增强全身吸收。