Pharmacokinetics of 2 oral paracetamol formulations in hospitalized octogenarians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims It is currently unclear how paracetamol should be dosed in order to increase its efficacy while warranting safety in very old adults. The objective was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of 2 oral paracetamol formulations and its metabolites in hospitalized octogenarians. Methods Geriatric inpatients aged 80 years and older received a 1000‐mg paracetamol tablet or granulate at 08.00, 14.00 and 20.00. After at least 4 consecutive gifts, plasma samples were collected around the 08.00 dose (trough, +0.5, +1, +2, +4, +5 and +6 h). Plasma concentrations of paracetamol and its metabolites were determined and individual pharmacokinetic parameters were derived. The Edmonton Frail Scale was used to assess frailty. An analgesic plasma target was defined as an average plasma concentration (Cavg) of 10 mg/L. Results The mean (±standard deviation) age was 86.78 (±4.20) years. The majority (n = 26/36, 72%) received the tablet, 10 (28%) the granulate. Thirty patients (85%) were classified with moderate to severe frailty. Seven (21%) patients had a Cavg above 10 mg/L. The median [interquartile range] time to reach the peak concentration was 50.5 [31.50–92.50] and 42.50 [33.75–106.75] min for the tablet and granulate, respectively. The coefficient of variation was 95% for time to reach the peak concentration and 30% for Cavg of paracetamol. A correlation of Cavg of paracetamol was observed with female sex and total serum bilirubin. Conclusion Large interindividual differences were found for pharmacokinetic parameters of oral paracetamol in frail inpatients after multiple dosing. Female sex and higher total serum bilirubin concentrations were associated with paracetamol exposure. No significant differences were observed between the tablet and granulate.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".