Pharmacokinetic study in pigs and<i>in vitro</i>metabolic characterization in pig- and human-liver microsomes reveal marked differences in disposition and metabolism of tiletamine and zolazepam (Telazol)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. An equal-dose combination of tiletamine and zolazepam (Telazol®) is used as a veterinary anesthetic. There also have been reports of human abuse of Telazol®. The pharmacokinetics and metabolic fate of tiletamine and zolazepam and the rationale for their administration as an equal-dose combination are unclear. 2. The single-dose pharmacokinetics of intramuscular tiletamine and zolazepam (3 mg/kg each) in 16 Yorkshire-crossbred pigs were determined. The metabolites of tiletamine and zolazepam in pig plasma and urine were identified by mass spectrometry. The metabolic stability of tiletamine and zolazepam and the kinetics of formation of their metabolites by pig- and human-liver microsomes were determined. 3. Higher concentrations of zolazepam were observed in pig plasma and it was cleared more slowly compared to tiletamine (apparent clearance: 11 versus 134 l/h; half-life: 2.76 versus 1.97 h). Three metabolites of zolazepam and one metabolite of tiletamine were identified in pig urine, plasma and in microsomal incubations. In vitro formation of each of these metabolites in microsomes was biphasic involving a high-affinity/low-capacity and a low-affinity/high-capacity enzyme. The in vitro metabolic stability of tiletamine was considerably lower compared to zolazepam. 4. These results collectively point to major pharmacokinetic and metabolic differences between the two components of this fixed-dose anesthetic combination.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it