Effect of multidrug resistance modulators on activity against Haemonchus contortus and pharmacokinetics of ivermectin and moxidectin in sheep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resistance to the avermectin/milbemycin class of anthelmintics in nematodes has become a serious problem worldwide due to their unrestricted usage. Resistance to these compounds is attributed to the over-expression of the transport protein, P-glycoprotein (P-gp). P-gp acts by pumping drug molecules out from the cell or organism, P-gp efflux activity can be blocked using multidrug resistance (MDR) modulators associated with chemotherapy to enhance their therapeutic effect. A series of experiments was undertaken to determine if the association of the anthelmintics, ivermectin (IVM) and moxidectin (MOX), and MDR modulators would increase the anthelmintics' efficacy against resistant parasites. Using an in vitro migration assay, IVM and MOX in the presence or absence of verapamil (VRP), CL347,099 and cyclosporin A (CyA) were used against IVM- and MOX-selected strains of H. contortus. The modulators alone had no effect on reducing the number of migrating larvae, IVM and MOX had a significant increase in efficacy of 52.7 and 58,3% respectively, when used in association with VRP, above that obtained with the anthelmintics alone. CL347,099 was also able to significantly increase the IVM and MOX efficacy by 24.2 and 38.9%, respectively. The effect of IVM and MOX in combination with VRP and CL347,099 was determined in jirds infected with selected strains of H. contortus. The combinations of VRP with either IVM or MOX significantly reduced worm counts of the selected strains compared with the untreated controls, whereas IVM or MOX alone did not. CL347,099 plus MOX combination was significantly more efficacious than moxidectin alone against the selected strains. To evaluate the effect of VRP on the pharmacokinetic behaviour of the anthelmintics IVM and MOX, the drug combination was given to sheep. The IVM plus VRP treatment resulted in an increase of the pharmacokinetic parameters of IVM. The peak concentration (83%) and area under the curve (54%) were significantly differen
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".