Relative Variability in Bioavailability of Oral Controlled-Release Formulations of Oxycodone and Morphine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A retrospective analysis compared the coefficients of variation associated with the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and the extent of absorption (area under the curve [AUC] from 0 hour to the last observation) for oral, controlled-release tablet formulations of oxycodone (OxyContin) and morphine (MS Contin). Data from fasting, male subjects aged 18 to 45 years were taken from five controlled-release oxycodone (N = 82) and seven controlled-release morphine (N = 101) single-dose, bioequivalence studies. The coefficients of variation of Cmax and AUC were approximately 33% less for controlled-release oxycodone than for controlled-release morphine (P =.005). The variation from the minimum to maximum value was two to three times less for controlled-release oxycodone than for controlled-release morphine. Among healthy male subjects, the absorption of oxycodone from oral controlled-release oxycodone was significantly more consistent than the absorption of morphine from oral controlled-release morphine in terms of both maximum absorption and extent of absorption.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 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".