Novel oral amphotericin B formulation (iCo-010) remains highly effective against murine systemic candidiasis following exposure to tropical temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the antifungal activity of amphotericin B (AmB) in a mouse model of systemic candidiasis following administration of a novel oral AmB formulation (iCo-010) that has been pre-exposed to tropical temperatures. METHODS: Amphotericin B (AmB) was prepared as a 5 mg/mL dispersion in a mixture of Peceol, Gelucire 44/14 and VitE-TPGS 2,3 (iCo-010). The formulation was protected from light and incubated in a sealed container at 43 °C for 60 days. Mice infected with Candida albicans were treated with either iCo-010 formulation pre-incubated at 43 °C for 60 days or freshly prepared iCo-010 formulation at doses of 5, 10 and 20 mg/kg once daily for five consecutive days. Single intravenous 5 mg/kg dose of AmBisome® was used as a positive control group. Seven days following the last dose, the kidney, liver, spleen, lung, heart and brain were removed and the number of colony forming units (CFUs) was determined as a measure of tissue fungal load. In addition, the concentration of AmB within each tissue was determined using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the reduction of CFUs and the concentration of AmB recovered in all organs at all iCo-010 doses tested between the freshly prepared iCo-010 formulation compared to the formulation that was incubated at 43 °C for 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: A novel oral AmB formulation, iCo-010, incubated at 43 °C for 60 days to simulate the exposure of the formulation to tropical temperatures remained highly effective against murine systemic candidiasis.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".