Pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of amphotericin B in rats following oral administration in a novel lipid-based formulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of amphotericin B (AmB) following oral administration in a novel mono/diglyceride-phospholipid formulation and to compare with intravenous (iv) administrations using commercial formulations. METHODS: Rats were allocated into the following treatment groups: oral gavage of AmB dispersed in mono/diglyceride-phospholipid formulation at doses of 4.5 and 10 mg/kg; iv bolus administration of 0.8 mg/kg Fungizone; iv bolus of 5 mg/kg Abelcet and iv bolus of 5 mg/kg AmBisome. Blood was sampled from jugular vein cannula at certain time points. The animals were sacrificed 72 h following administration of AmB and multiple tissues were harvested. The concentration of AmB in plasma and tissues was determined by means of HPLC. The plasma creatinine concentrations were determined using an enzymatic kit. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution of AmB following iv administrations of the commercial formulations were found to be highly formulation dependent. The terminal half-life and biodistribution of orally administered AmB in a mono/diglyceride-phospholipid formulation resembled those of Fungizone. The larger volume of the co-administered lipid-based formulation in the case of the higher dose of orally administered AmB resulted in flip-flop kinetics and in preferential distribution into the kidneys. No nephrotoxicity was detected for any formulation and route of administration. CONCLUSIONS: Oral administration of AmB in a mono/diglyceride-phospholipid formulation to rats resulted in significant intestinal absorption into the systemic circulation with pharmacokinetic and biodistribution properties similar to a micellar iv preparation.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".