MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038572124 · doi:10.1177/0091270011422815

Disposition of Atorvastatin, Rosuvastatin, and Simvastatin in Oatp1b2‐/‐ Mice and Intraindividual Variability in Human Subjects

2011· article· en· W2038572124 on OpenAlexafffund
Marianne K. DeGorter, Bradley L. Urquhart, Ulrike Gradhand, Rommel G. Tirona, Richard B. Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLawson Health Research InstituteLondon Health Sciences Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRosuvastatinSimvastatinAtorvastatinStatinContext (archaeology)MedicinePharmacokineticsPharmacologyCrossover studyInternal medicineHMG-CoA reductaseBioavailabilityEndocrinologyChemistryPlaceboBiologyBiochemistryPathologyReductaseEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Response to statin therapy is often unpredictable because of variability in metabolism and transport. In the recently created organic anion transporting-polypeptide 1b2 (Oatp1b2/Slco1b2)-null mice, the investigators found significantly lower liver-to-plasma ratios compared with controls for atorvastatin (16.0 ± 5.1 vs 43.5 ± 13.7, P = .002) and rosuvastatin (15.2 ± 3.3 vs 28.4 ± 9.3, P = .03), but not simvastatin (5.2 ± 1.1 vs 6.3 ± 2.9, P = .49), following tail vein injection of 1 mg/kg of each drug. In addition, the investigators examined intraindividual variation in atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin pharmacokinetics in healthy human subjects in a crossover study design. Areas under the plasma concentration-time curve of atorvastatin and simvastatin acid were significantly related (Spearman r = 0.68; P = .035), whereas rosuvastatin profile was not related to atorvastatin or simvastatin exposure. Together, these results in mice and humans demonstrate that predictability of exposure to one statin based on another is dependent on the specific statin pairs and the context in which they are compared.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PharmacologySame topicDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsFrench-language works237,207