HPLC-MS Determined Enalapril in Human Plasma Its Pharmacokinetic and Relative Bioavailability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To determine enalapil in human plasma by HPLC-MS method,and study its pharmacokinetics, relative bioavailability. Methods: The enalapril concentrations in plasma through solid-phase extraction were determined by HPLC-MS;ODS C18 column:the selected ion was determined by ESI+:The mobile phase:methanol-0.01% tormic add (45:55);The flow rate:0.8,mL·min-1; Capillary: 3.81kV;Cone:39.00 V.The test and reference formulations of enalapril tabets were given to 18 healthy male volunteers.Results:The calibration curve was linear within the range of 2.5-400ng·mL-1,r=0.9996,the recovery was 102.2%,RSD of intraday and inter-day were no more than 4.6% and 8.2%,After a single oral dose of 20 mg enalapril tartrate test or reference tablet,kthe main pharmacokinetic parameters AUC0-6, Cmax, T1/ 2 were (322.6±79.1) and (323.1±70.5) ng·h·mL-1, (229.8±54.4) and (237.3±48.1) ng·mL-1,(1. 80±0.60)and (1.50±0.30) h respectively. Relative bioavailability was(99.7±8.2) %. Conclusion:The method is accurate and sensitive with no endogenous interference. No significant difference exists among the main pharmacokinetic parameters for the experimeental tablets and the reference. The two formulations were bioequivalent.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.014 | 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".