PHARMACOKINETICS AND TOLERABILITY OF 40???0-[2-HYDROXYETHYL]RAPAMYCIN IN DE NOVO LIVER TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: 40-0-[2-Hydroxyethyl]rapamycin (RAD), a novel macrolide with potent immunosuppressive and antiproliferative activities, prevents rejection in animal allotransplantation models. This phase I trial assessed the effects of bile diversion, administration route, and time after transplant on RAD pharmacokinetics after single-dose administration in de novo liver allograft recipients. The influence of RAD on cyclosporine (CsA) pharmacokinetics and the safety of RAD were also evaluated. METHODS: Twenty-six de novo liver allograft recipients were assigned to one of four treatment groups based on the presence or absence of a T tube, administration route (nasogastric or nasoduodenal), and timing of RAD administration. Patients received a single 7.5-mg RAD dose on one to three occasions in addition to CsA (Neoral) and corticosteroids. Steady-state cyclosporine profiles with and without RAD coadministration were evaluated. Results. Recipients with bile diversion demonstrated lower peak concentration (Cmax) than those without, but overall drug exposure (AUC) was not altered. Cmax and AUC were not influenced by administration route. A trend towards higher Cmax on postoperative day 3 than on postoperative day 1 was noted, although AUC was not altered. Single-dose RAD coadministration did not affect steady-state CsA pharmacokinetics. RAD was well tolerated and caused few drug-related adverse effects. RAD administration did not increase infection rates or produce clinically significant changes in laboratory parameters. Conclusions. In de novo liver transplant recipients, the overall extent of RAD absorption was not influenced by bile diversion, administration route, or time of administration. CsA pharmacokinetics were not affected by single-dose RAD coadministration. RAD capsules administered in single doses of 7.5 mg were well tolerated and safe.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".