Bibliographic record
Abstract
The central nervous system (CNS) distribution kinetics of indinavir were extensively evaluated using a combinational in-vivo model comprising the integration plot method (a single-passage approach) and neuropharmacokinetic method (a multiple-passage approach). A 5 mg kg(-1) dose of indinavir was administered intravenously to rats. Blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples and whole brain were collected from the animals at specified time points and the drug concentration in each sample was determined using a high-performance liquid chromatography method. For the neuropharmacokinetic study, the simultaneous plasma, CSF and brain concentrations were fitted to an integrated model, which resulted in the estimation of the influx (K(in)) and efflux (K(out)) rate constants of the drug to/from CSF and brain parenchyma. The integration plot method involved plotting the brain-plasma or CSF-plasma concentration ratios (K(p, app)) against AUC(0-->t)/C(p(t)), and estimating the uptake clearance of the drug by brain/CSF from the slope of the initial linear portion of the plot. The K(in) and K(out) values of the drug to/from CSF were estimated to be 2.42 x 10(-2) and 13.26 x 10(-2)min(-1), respectively, and the corresponding values for brain parenchyma were 1.02 x 10(-2) and 1.32 x 10(-2) min(-1), respectively. The uptake clearances of indinavir by CSF and brain parenchyma were 8.89 and 8.38microL min(-1)g(-1), respectively. The permeability surface area products of the drug for the blood-brain barrier and blood-CSF barrier were estimated as 1.05 x 10(-2) and 2.45 x 10(-2) mLmin(-1)g(-1), respectively. The estimated kinetic parameters indicated limited CNS entry of the drug because of the limited blood-brain barrier permeability and the efficient drug efflux from CNS, particularly from CSF.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".