Trospium chloride has no effect on memory testing and is assay undetectable in the central nervous system of older patients with overactive bladder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Muscarinic receptors in the brain play an important role in cognitive function, especially memory, and there is growing awareness that specific antimuscarinic drugs for overactive bladder (OAB) may have adverse central nervous system (CNS) effects. Selection of an antimuscarinic OAB drug with reduced potential for CNS effects could be especially beneficial in the elderly people, in whom even the modest cognitive impairment may negatively affect independence. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to determine if trospium chloride is assay detectable in the CNS of older adults with OAB and to assess whether deterioration of memory occurs in these individuals. METHODS: Twelve cognitively intact older adults (>or=65-75 years old) with OAB were given extended-release trospium chloride 60 mg once daily over a 10-day period to achieve plasma steady-state levels. Standardised memory testing (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised) was performed predose and postdose. Cerebrospinal spinal fluid (CSF) and plasma samples were drawn on day 10 and assayed for trospium chloride. Predose (day 0) and postdose (day 10) results on the memory tests were compared using a reliable change index to assess a meaningful change in learning or memory. RESULTS: Trospium chloride levels in all the CSF samples (n = 72) of all participants were assay undetectable (<40 pg/ml) on day 10 at steady-state peak plasma concentration concurrent with measureable peak plasma values (C(max) = 925 pg/ml). Repeat memory testing revealed no significant net drug effect on learning or recall. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate for the presence of an OAB antimuscarinic in the human brain, performed by assaying for concentrations of trospium chloride and correlating with simultaneous clinical cognitive safety measures. The results of both pharmacological and neuropsychological testing support the hypothesis of a lack of detectable CNS penetration for the quaternary amine trospium chloride.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".