The Effect of Doxorubicin Administration on Intramuscular BCAA Concentrations in the Rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to examine the effect of Doxorubicin (DOX) administration on total intramuscular branch chained amino acids (BCAA) in the soleus (SOL) and white gastrocnemius (WG) of the rat following a single IP administration of 1.5 or 4.5 mg/kg DOX after 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, 168 and 192 hrs. The administration of 1.5 mg/kg DOX did not cause significant changes in BCAA concentrations in the SOL or the WG. However the 4.5 mg/kg dose resulted in a decrease (P<0.05) of BCAA in the SOL 24, 168 and 192 hours (105±8, 120±10 and 155±15 µmol/kg dw, respectively) post injection compared to control (304±34 µmol/kg dw). Similarly, BCAA significantly decreased in the WG 24, 144, 168 and 192 hours (93±8, 123±10, 107±11 and 154±19 µmol/kg dw, respectively) after the administration of the 4.5 mg/kg dose compared to control (317±44 µmol/kg dw). BCAA concentrations in the SOL were decreased (P<0.05) following the 4.5 mg/kg dose, when compared to 1.5 mg/kg, after 24 (224±3 %), 72 (138±3 %), 144 (154±2 %), 168 (183±5 %) and 192 hours (149±6 %). Likewise, BCAA concentrations in the WG were decreased (P<0.05) following the administration of 4.5 mg/kg DOX after 24 (288±8 %), 144 (224±1 %), 168 (239±8 %) and 192 hours (151±11 %) when compared to the 1.5 mg/kg dose. There were no consistent differences when comparing between muscle types. These data represent, for the first time, alterations in BCAA in the skeletal muscle as a function of DOX administration. This presents a significant clinical implication as a single administration of DOX effectively reduces BCAA which promotes muscle wasting and a poor clinical outcome. Supported by NSERC.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".