The pharmacokinetics and comparative bioavailabilty of oral and subcutaneous semaglutide in healthy volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In this study, the comparative bioavailability of semaglutide following the administration of oral (PO) and subcutaneous (SC) doses in healthy subjects was evaluated. The pharmacokinetics of semaglutide of these formulations at lower doses (SC dose of 0.25 mg; PO dose of 3 mg) was examined by utilizing a sensitive bioanalytical method. METHODS: Twenty-two subjects were administered either 0.25 mg SC or 3 mg PO and blood samples were taken up to 504 h. The samples were assayed for semaglutide with an analytical range of 0.05-50 ng/mL. The pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using a non-compartmental approach and were used to evaluate the comparative bioavailability of semaglutide. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetics of semaglutide was characterized following the administration of low subcutaneous and oral doses. The comparative bioavailability (PO relative to SC) was 0.66 % at the doses administered. Overall, the study drug was well tolerated, and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The bioavailability of semaglutide following oral and subcutaneous administrations has been determined using a validated bioanalytical method. This method will enable more investigations into the pharmacokinetics of all formulations of semaglutide at lower doses, which will enable a better understanding of its' disposition in healthy subjects and in patients.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".