MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319771740 · doi:10.5740/jaoacint.11-080

High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Determination of Memantine in Human Urine Following Solid-Phase Extraction and Precolumn Derivatization

2013· article· en· W2319771740 on OpenAlexaff
Karim Michail, Hoda G. Daabees, Y. A. Beltagy, Magdy Abd Elkhalek, Mona M. Khamis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of AOAC International · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatographyChemistryAmantadineDerivatizationUrineHigh-performance liquid chromatographySolid phase extractionExtraction (chemistry)MemantinePharmacologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A validated HPLC-UV method is presented for the quantification of urinary memantine hydrochloride, a novel medication approved to treat moderate and advanced cases of Alzheimer's disease. The drug and amantadine hydrochloride, the internal standard, were extracted from human urine using SPE. The extract was then buffered and derivatized at room temperature using o-phthalaldehyde in the presence of N-acetyl-L-cyteine. Chromatographic separation of the formed derivatives was achieved on a C18 column using methanol-water mobile phase adjusted to pH 7 and pumped isocratically at 1 mL/min. The UV detector was set at 340 nm. The chromatographic run time did not exceed 10 min. The LOD and LOQ were 8 and 20 ng/mL, respectively. The RSDs for intraday and interday precisions did not exceed 5.5%. The method was used to monitor memantine hydrochloride in human urine in order to determine an appropriate sampling interval for future noninvasive therapeutic drug monitoring. The assay could also be applied to the determination of amantadine. The described assay showed that a postdosing time interval of 25-75 h seems adequate for sampling and monitoring memantine in urine.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.376 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AOAC InternationalSame topicAnalytical Methods in PharmaceuticalsFrench-language works237,207