Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Linagliptin and Tadalafil in Healthy Egyptian Males Using a Novel LC–MS Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Assessment of pharmacokinetic interaction between linagliptin (LNG) and tadalafil (TDL) in healthy males. Methods: First, a novel LC–MS method was developed; second, a Phase IV, open-label, cross-over study was performed. Volunteers took single 20-mg TDL dose on day 1 followed by wash out period of 2 weeks then multiple oral dosing of 5-mg/day LNG for 13 days. On day 13, volunteers were co-administered 20-mg TDL. Results: LNG and TDL single doses did not affect QTc interval. Smoking did not alter pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of LNG and TDL. Co-administration of LNG with TDL resulted in TDL longer time to reach maximum plasma concentration (Tmax), decreased oral clearance (Cl/F) and oral volume of distribution (Vd/F), increased its maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), area under concentration-time curve (AUC), muscle pain and QTc prolongation. Conclusion: LNG and TDL co-administration warrants monitoring and/or TDL dose adjustment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".