MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166667864 · doi:10.18433/j39c76

Simultaneous Determination of Levocetirizine and Pseudoephedrine in Dog Plasma by Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry in the Presence of Dextrocetirizine

2012· article· en· W2166667864 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jae Kuk Ryu, Sun Dong Yoo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevocetirizinePseudoephedrineChromatographyCetirizineChemistryPharmacologyMedicineEphedrineOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study describes the development of a rapid and sensitive LC-ESI-MS assay for simultaneous enantioselective determination of levocetirizine and pseudoephedrine in dog plasma in the presence of dextrocetirizine. METHODS: Separations were achieved on an Ultron ES-OVM chiral column using the mobile phase consisting of 10 mM aqueous NH4OAc (pH 6.6) and acetonitrile (9:1 v/v). RESULTS: The retention times of pseudoephedrine, dextrocetirizine, levocetirizine and diazepam (internal standard) were 5.2, 8.3, 9.6 and 11.6 min, respectively, and the total run time was less than 15 min. The assay was validated to demonstrate the linearity, accuracy and precision, recovery and stability. The calibration curves were linear over the concentration range from 1 - 200 ng/mL for levocetirizine and from 5 - 1000 ng/mL for pseudoephedrine. CONCLUSIONS: The developed assay was successfully applied to a pharmacokinetic study after oral administration of the racemic cetirizine (0.5 mg/kg, or 0.25 mg/kg as levocetirizine) and pseudoephedrine (12 mg/kg) in the dog. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.360 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical SciencesSame topicAnalytical Methods in PharmaceuticalsFrench-language works237,207