Evaluating the Protective Effects of a Pet Supplement Containing Calcium Carbonate, Magnesium Hydroxide and Natural Ingredients (Gastrik Pet®, Candioli S.r.l.) on Gastric Cells and Cytotoxicity Reduction under Hyperacidity Conditions: An In Vitro Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective acid suppression is crucial for treating gastritis in pets. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate and compare the protective effects of two products on gastric cells under conditions of high acidity: 1) a supplement (Gastrik Pet®, Candioli srl) containing selected natural ingredients including Promugel®(a complex of mucilage protecting the mucosa from gastric acidity: Guar meal, Psyllium (Plantago Ovata L.), Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) and antacid salts (calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide) and 2) sucralfate, a treatment used in human and veterinary medicine. Gastrik Pet® showed superior efficacy in protecting gastric cells from acid-induced cytotoxicity at all concentrations tested compared to sucralfate. These results suggest that this natural pet supplement could be a promising option for managing gastritis-related conditions in pets. Further research, including in vivo studies, is needed to confirm these findings and assess its clinical potential.
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".