Bioavailability of four ursodeoxycholic acid preparations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the drug of choice for treating primary biliary cirrhosis and dissolving cholesterol gallstones. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the bioavailability of four commercially available ursodeoxycholic acid formulations in standardized doses. METHODS: Twenty-four healthy subjects were studied in groups of four, and received each of the different UDCA preparations in random order, with a 1-week washout or more in-between. Serum UDCA levels were determined for a 6-h period. The mean area under the curve (AUC), Cmax and Tmax were determined for each drug formulation, and the results compared. Dose proportionality was determined using the Canadian Ursofalk tablet using either 250 mg, 500 mg or 750 mg dosing. The intraparticipant variability was assessed by asking each participant to repeat the last drug that they took the second time, 1 week later. RESULTS: The mean AUC was 68.99 micromol/1.6 h-1 for the USA UDCA tablet, 59.34 micromol/1.6 h-1 for the Canadian UDCA tablet, 55.55 micromol/1.6 h-1 for Ursolvan capsules, and 46.66 micromol/1.6 h-1 for Actigall capsules. The mean Cmax values were 24.29, 17.85, 16.63 and 413.32 nmol/mL, respectively. The mean Tmax was 1.82, 2.3, 2.79 and 3.39 h, respectively. Linear aggression analysis assessing the direct proportionality of AUC on the dose for the Canadian UDCA tablet gave an estimate of 0.063 + 0.0164 (standard error, P-value=0.0117), e.g. if the dose increases from 250 mg to 500 mg, the serum ursodeoxycholic acid increases by 250 x 0.063=15.75. There was excellent reproducibility for the AUC for the North American tablets (0.97, 0.88) compared to the two capsules (0.32, 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: The significantly higher AUC and Cmax and shorter Tmax for the Canadian Ursofalk tablets compared to the UDCA capsule preparations supports better bioavailability.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.015 | 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 teacher head, 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".