Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Oltipraz and Silymarin in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction between oltipraz and silymarin after intravenous and oral administration of both drugs to male Sprague-Dawley rats. METHODS: Oltipraz (single doses of 10 and 30 mg/kg for intravenous and oral administration, respectively), silymarin (single doses of 50 and 100 mg/kg for intravenous and oral administration, respectively, and 14 days oral administration of 100 mg/kg), alone and together were administered to control rats. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic parameters of oltipraz did not significantly altered by silymarin. However, after intravenous administration of the drugs together, the AUCs of unconjugated, conjugated, and total (unconjugated plus conjugated) silibinin were significantly different (32.7% decrease, and 32.1% and 27.2% increase, respectively), and total and (CL) and non-renal (CL NR ) clearance of unconjugated silibinin were significantly faster (49.4% and 61.1% increase, respectively) than those of silymarin alone (without oltipraz). After oral administration of silymarin with or without oltipraz, however, the pharmacokinetic parameters of unconjugated, conjugated, and total silibinin were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: After single intravenous administration of the drugs together, the AUC of unconjugated silibinin was significantly smaller, but that of both conjugated and total silibinin was significantly greater. This could have been due to an increase in the formation of conjugates (glucuronidation and sulfation) of silibinin as induced by oltipraz. After simultaneous oral administration of the drugs, however, the AUCs (or AUC 0-12 h) of unconjugated, conjugated, and total silibinin were comparable.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".