Effect of a Triphasic Oral Contraceptive on Drug‐Metabolizing Enzyme Activity as Measured by the Validated Cooperstown 5+1 Cocktail
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of a common oral contraceptive preparation on the activity of 7 drug-metabolizing enzymes were investigated using the validated Cooperstown 5+1 Cocktail. In a randomized crossover fashion, 10 premenopausal women received caffeine, dextromethorphan, omeprazole, intravenous midazolam, and warfarin + vitamin K with and without a triphasic oral contraceptive (ethinyl estradiol 35 microg) and varying doses of daily norgestimate (0.18, 0.215, and 0.25 mg). Bioequivalence testing showed nonequivalence in drug versus no-drug treatment on the activity of drug-metabolizing enzymes (as reflected by metabolite ratios following probe drug administration); the activity of CYP1A2, CYP2C19, and NAT-2 decreased following the oral contraceptive, whereas the activity of CYP2C9 and CYP2D6 increased. No effects on xanthine oxidase or hepatic CYP3A were seen. Application of a non-parametric statistical testing approach revealed a significant difference only for CYP1A2 and CYP2C19. This triphasic oral contraceptive may have a clinically significant effect on the activity of some drug-metabolizing enzymes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".