Pharmacokinetics of Omeprazole in Healthy Adults and in Children with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of the pharmacokinetics of omeprazole in children with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remain scarce despite the vast number of reports on its efficacy. The objectives of this study were to assess the pharmacokinetics of omeprazole in healthy adults and in children with GERD. Omeprazole (Losec, delayed-release capsules) was administered orally to 18 healthy adults (mean age 36.8 years) and 12 children with GERD (mean age 6.1 years). Blood samples were collected over 5 hours, and plasma concentrations were assessed using liquid chromatography. Population pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using NONMEM. A 1-compartment model with zero-order absorption and a lag time was used. The population approach was well suited to the limited number of samples available, and residual variability was low. Oral clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V(ss)/F) in healthy adults (Mean +/- SD: 0.62 +/- 0.27 L/h/kg and 0.76 +/- 0.26 L/kg, respectively) were not significantly different than those in children with GERD (0.51 +/- 0.34 L/h/kg and 0.66 +/- 0.25 L/kg, respectively). Healthy adults displayed a statistically significantly longer delay in drug absorption (Lag time: 0.62 +/- 0.15 hours) as compared with that observed in children with GERD (0.12 +/- 0.03 hours, P < 0.05). On the basis of these findings, omeprazole dosings on a milligram-per-kilogram basis are recommended with no further adjustments for the treatment of GERD in children.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".