Basic and clinical pharmacology of new motility promoting agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research has provided new information about drugs that could be used to treat functional motility disorders. Promotility drugs accelerate gastric emptying or colonic transit and these properties may contribute to their efficacy in treating symptoms associated with gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia or constipation. 5-Hydroxytryptamine4 receptors are targets for drugs (tegaserod, renzapride) that treat symptoms in constipated irritable bowel syndrome patients and in gastroparesis. Drugs acting at motilin (erythromycin) and cholecystokinin-1 (dexloxiglumide) receptors accelerate gastric emptying. Dexloxiglumide might be useful in the treatment of functional dyspepsia particularly that associated with lipid intake. Alvimopan is a mu-opioid receptor antagonist that does not cross the blood brain barrier. Alvimopan is effective in treating postsurgical ileus and perhaps opiate-induced bowel dysfunction. Successes and failures of recent efforts to develop promotility agents revealed opportunities and challenges for developing new promotility drugs. The pharmacological properties of partial agonists might be exploited to develop effective promotility drugs. However, opposing actions of promotility agents on motility (increased contraction vs decreased accommodation) limit the clinical efficacy of drugs with these opposing actions. Selection of appropriate patient populations for evaluation of new drugs is also critical.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".