Pharmacokinetics of hydromorphone hydrochloride after intravenous and intramuscular administration in guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: ). ANIMALS: 8 healthy adult guinea pigs (4 sexually intact females and 4 sexually intact males). PROCEDURES: In a crossover study, hydromorphone (0.3 mg/kg) was administered once IM (epaxial musculature) or IV (cephalic catheter) to each guinea pig at a 1-week interval (2 treatments/guinea pig). Blood samples were collected before and at predetermined intervals after drug administration via a vascular access port. Plasma hydromorphone concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Noncompartmental analysis of data was used to calculate pharmacokinetic parameters. RESULTS: Mean ± SD clearance and volume of distribution for hydromorphone administered IV were 52.8 ± 13.5 mL/min/kg and 2.39 ± 0.479 L/kg, respectively. Mean residence time determined for the IV and IM administration routes was 0.77 ± 0.14 hours and 0.99 ± 0.34 hours, respectively. The maximum observed plasma concentration following IM administration of hydromorphone was 171.9 ± 29.4 ng/mL. No sedative effects were observed after drug administration by either route. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Pharmacokinetic data indicated that hydromorphone at a dose of 0.3 mg/kg may be administered IV every 2 to 3 hours or IM every 4 to 5 hours to maintain a target plasma concentration between 2 and 4 ng/mL in guinea pigs. Hydromorphone had high bioavailability after IM administration. Further research is necessary to evaluate the effects of other doses and administration routes and the analgesic effects of hydromorphone in guinea pigs.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".