Relative Bioavailability and Antioxidant Potential of Two Coenzyme Q10 Preparations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) is synthesized by the human body and found in certain foods. Daily supplementation of CoQ10 could protect against heart disease but the bioavailability of CoQ10 supplements depends on the formulation taken. We compared the bioavailability and antioxidant properties of two commercial CoQ10 formulations, a commercial grade CoQ10 powder (commercial grade CoQ) and a new BT-CoQ10 BIO-TRANSFORMED (BT-CoQ10) obtained by fermentation of a soy-based, CoQ10-rich media with baker's yeast. Eleven healthy individuals participated in a randomized two-way crossover trial, with a 3-week washout period. Capsules containing 300 mg of either BT-CoQ10 or commercial grade CoQ10 were given daily for 1 week and multiple blood samples were taken for CoQ10, glutathione and glutathione peroxidase (GPx) determination. In 3 subjects, baseline plasma CoQ10 levels were lower prior to BT than prior to commercial grade CoQ treatment. In the remaining participants, ingestion of BT vs. commercial grade CoQ significantly increased maximum plasma CoQ10 concentration (+126%, p = 0.04) and tended to increase CoQ10 area under the curve from 0 to 24 h (+160%, p = 0.07). One week of treatment with each formulation increased plasma CoQ10 but did not alter plasma glutathione or GPx activity. The enhanced bioavailability of the BT product might be due to its predominantly reduced, hydrophilic membrane-complex form.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".