MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984732897 · doi:10.1097/fjc.0b013e3181fc45bb

Pharmacokinetic and Antihypertensive Profile of Amlodipine and Felodipine-ER in Younger Versus Older Patients With Hypertension

2010· article· en· W1984732897 on OpenAlexafffund
Frans H. H. Leenen, Elizabeth Coletta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFelodipineAmlodipineDosingPharmacokineticsMedicineDihydropyridineBlood pressurePlaceboInternal medicineEndocrinologyPharmacologyCalcium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To evaluate the impact of age on the pharmacokinetics and blood pressure (BP) responses of a dihydropyridine (DHP) with large versus small first-pass metabolism in hypertensive subjects, younger (n = 28) and older (n = 35) patients with hypertension were randomized to placebo, felodipine-ER 5 mg/d, or amlodipine 5 mg/d. In the young subjects, the first dose of either DHP did not decrease BP and chronic dosing decreased BP by approximately 10 mm Hg, which had disappeared by 24 hours. In the older group, felodipine-ER decreased systolic BP by approximately 10 mm Hg after the first dose and by approximately 20 mm Hg after chronic dosing, which had disappeared after 24 hours. The first dose of amlodipine caused a gradual fall in BP and chronic dosing by approximately 20 mm Hg and still by approximately 10 mm Hg at 120 hours. Older subjects showed approximately 30% higher area under the concentration–time curves and plasma concentrations of felodipine and amlodipine, but (apparent) elimination half-lives did not differ between younger and older subjects. The chronic antihypertensive responses correlated well with both plasma levels and pretreatment BP. Age has only a modest impact on the pharmacokinetics of amlodipine and felodipine-ER but markedly affects the BP response to the first dose of either DHP and the duration of action after chronic dosing of amlodipine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular PharmacologySame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207