Toxicological evaluation of Ultrapure and Potent Tannic Acid (UPPTA) by inhalation exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The therapeutic options for coronal virus infections are limited. As SARS-CoV-2 directly targets the lungs and causes lung damage, treatment of COVID-19 with inhalants may offer more advantages over oral administration. Inhaled drug delivery provides a higher drug concentration in the target organ, where SARS-CoV-2 proliferates. In this study, we evaluated the potential systemic toxicity, relevant target organ toxicity, and toxicokinetics of Airnecflu®, Ultrapure, and Potent Tannic Acid (UPPTA) by metered-dose inhaler (MDI) inhalation to rodent and canine species once a day for 2 consecutive weeks. We further investigated the reversibility of the toxicity following a 3-week recovery period. No mortality related to the test article was observed in all the dose groups. Neither abnormalities related to the test article nor toxicologically significant changes were observed in both rodent and canine studies. In pathological examination, alveolar macrophage aggregation, perivascular/interstitial/alveolar inflammatory cell infiltration, and alveolar/bronchial epithelium hyperplasia were noted in the lung with bronchial involvement. However, after a 3-week recovery period, a substantial recovery was observed. There is limited systemic exposure to the inhalation administration. Therefore, inhalation of Airnecflu® UPPTA is safe to administer for respiratory disorders like COVID-19.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".