A study of the effect of temperature on the pharmacokinetic profile of raltitrexed administered by intraperitoneal route in the rat.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because heat can improve the activity of selected drugs when administered heated in the peritoneal cavity in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal origin, there is a great interest to evaluate new cytotoxic agents in this context. The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of heat on the pharmacokinetic profile of Raltitrexed administered intraperitoneally in rats. MATERIAL/METHODS: Rats #1 to #40 have been submitted to different doses of intraperitoneal Raltitrexed (2, 4, and 8 mg/m2) at different perfusion temperatures (37, 40 and 43 degrees C). After 25 minutes of perfusion, peritoneal fluid, portal and systemic blood were harvested and prepared for dosage of Raltitrexed. Rats #41 to #50 have been submitted to 8 mg/m2 of intraperitoneal Raltitrexed (37 and 43 degrees C) during 25 minutes. Then, a segment of small bowel and a section of parietal peritoneum were harvested and prepared for intracellular dosage of Raltitrexed. RESULTS: The dose of Raltitrexed administered is a determinant of its concentration in peritoneal perfusate, in portal vein blood and in systemic blood (p < 0.0002). We noticed that perfusate temperature had no significant effect on the concentration of drug in the portal vein blood (p = 0.29) and in the systemic blood (p = 0.25). However, temperature increased significantly (p < 0.04) the intracellular absorption of Raltitrexed. CONCLUSIONS: Because the effect of Raltitrexed is proportional to its intracellular concentration, it seems clear that Raltitrexed is of greatest interest when administered heated in the peritoneum because it can reach greater intracellular concentrations without a significant increase in systemic concentration, which is responsible of toxicity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".