Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometric Analytical Method for Study of Colchicine in Rats Given Low Doses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A selective and sensitive assay was developed for colchicine in rat specimens. Colchicine and its deuterated analog (as internal standard, IS) were extracted from rat specimens (minimal 0.1 mL plasma, whole blood, or urine) using liquid-liquid extraction with n-hexane:dichloromethane:isopropanol. The mobile phase (formic acid: ammonium acetate: methanol) was pumped with uniform flow through an octadecylsilane analytical column. Detection was carried out by electrospray positive ionization in the multiple-reaction monitoring mode. The assay (total run time <3 min) had excellent linearity over a wide (400–800-fold) concentration range. The mean absolute recovery was >96.8%. The intra- and inter-day coefficients of variation were ˂15%, with lower limits of quantitation of 0.5 ng/mL in 0.1 mL of rat plasma. The method also provided the same lower limits of quantitation in urine and whole blood with 0.1 mL volumes, and 0.1 ng/mL using 0.5 mL of rat plasma. The blood-to-plasma ratio was >1. Rats had measurable colchicine blood concentrations for at least 24 h after intravenous doses of 0.1 mg/kg. The method possessed suitable measures of sensitivity and selectivity for detecting colchicine in several specimen types in rats given low doses.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 it