The effect of acyclovir on the tubular secretion of creatinine in vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While generally well tolerated, severe nephrotoxicity has been observed in some children receiving acyclovir. A pronounced elevation in plasma creatinine in the absence of other clinical manifestations of overt nephrotoxicity has been frequently documented. Several drugs have been shown to increase plasma creatinine by inhibiting its renal tubular secretion rather than by decreasing glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Creatinine and acyclovir may be transported by similar tubular transport mechanisms, thus, it is plausible that in some cases, the observed increase in plasma creatinine may be partially due to inhibition of tubular secretion of creatinine, and not solely due to decreased GFR. Our objective was to determine whether acyclovir inhibits the tubular secretion of creatinine. METHODS: Porcine (LLC-PK1) and human (HK-2) renal proximal tubular cell monolayers cultured on microporous membrane filters were exposed to [2-14C] creatinine (5 μM) in the absence or presence of quinidine (1E+03 μM), cimetidine (1E+03 μM) or acyclovir (22-89 μM) in incubation medium. RESULTS: Results illustrated that in evident contrast to quinidine, acyclovir did not inhibit creatinine transport in LLC-PK1 and HK-2 cell monolayers. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that acyclovir does not affect the renal tubular handling of creatinine, and hence, the pronounced, transient increase in plasma creatinine is due to decreased GFR, and not to a spurious increase in plasma creatinine.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".