MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Formulation of long‐acting nifedipine tablets influences the heart rate and sympathetic nervous system response in hypertensive patients

2007· article· en· W1974056229 on OpenAlexaff
Morris J. Brown, Corey B. Toal

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsBayer (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNifedipinePharmacokineticsMedicineCrossover studyPharmacodynamicsHeart rateBlood pressureHemodynamicsAnesthesiaPharmacologyDosingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT: Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics studies are usually carried out separately with theoretical linking or interpretations. The pharmacokinetics of short- vs. long-acting formulations of nifedipine is well known, but the pharmacokinetics of different once-a-day formulations of nifedipine is generally not well known by the practising physician. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: This study provides practical patient-based information linking pharmacokinetics to pharmacodynamics in one of the target populations of patients, those with hypertension, who might receive the two different drugs. AIMS The haemodynamic responses to nifedipine vary between short- and long-acting formulations. However, the latter have not been compared despite marked differences in their constitution. Our 1-month randomized, crossover study was designed to compare the 30-mg osmotic, constant-release nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (N-GITS) with an encapsulated mini-tablet Coracten XL. METHODS: Forty-four hypertensive patients aged 63 +/- 7 years were studied. The formulation was changed on day 15 and (for a single dose) day 30. At days 0, 14, 15, 29 and 30, patients were monitored for 6 h after dosing, during which blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR) and plasma levels of norepinephrine (NE) and nifedipine were measured. The primary outcome was the difference in plasma NE between formulations at the time of peak nifedipine level. RESULTS: Systolic BP decreased rapidly after the first dose of Coracten, achieving nadir at 5 h. HR rose by 1.2 +/- 8.8 beats min(-1). After N-GITS HR fell by 2.4 +/- 7.7 beats min(-1) (P = 0.159). Plasma NE was higher in the Coracten- (480 +/- 38.3 pg ml(-1)) than N-GITS-treated patients (343 +/- 75.0 pg ml(-1)) at the time of peak nifedipine concentrations (4 and 5 h, respectively) and their change from baseline was significantly (P = 0.0046) different. A similar difference between the drugs was seen again at days 15 and 30, at 5 h after switching formulations. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that two different formulations of once-daily nifedipine result in different BP and plasma NE responses, and that switching between formulations causes opposite effects upon the sympathetic nervous response to falling BP.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Clinical PharmacologySame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207