Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11883649›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical research2002

Ignoring pharmacokinetics may lead to isoboles misinterpretation: illustration with the norfloxacin-theophylline convulsant interaction in rats.

Miren Cadart, Sandrine Marchand, Claudine Pariat, Serge Bouquet, William Couet

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical research, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Miren CadartEquipe Emergente Medicaments et BHE, Faculté de Médecine & Pharmacie, Poitiers, France.
Sandrine Marchand
Claudine Pariat
Serge Bouquet
William Couet
Université de Poitiers · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the norfloxacin-theophylline convulsant interaction in vivo, with an experimental approach distinguishing between pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics contributions to the observed effect.

methodsMale Sprague Dawley rats (n = 38) were infused each compound separately or in different combination ratios. Infusion was maintained until the onset of maximal seizures. Cerebrospinal fluid and plasma samples were collected for high performance liquid chromatography drug determination. The nature and intensity of the pharmacodynamics interaction between drugs was quantified with an isobolographic approach.

resultsIsobolograms suggested a relatively marked antagonism between norfloxacin and theophylline at the cerebrospinal fluid (previously shown to be part of the biophase) and dose levels, but not at the plasma (free and total concentrations) levels. These apparent discrepancies could be explained by nonlinear distribution or/and distribution desequilibrium phenomenon.

conclusionsThese findings showed that the quantitative isobolographic approach is appropriate to assess the nature and intensity of the pharmacodynamic interaction between two drugs when data are collected within the biophase, but that data interpretation outside the biophase can be risky due to further pharmacokinetic complexities, in particular slow or/and nonlinear diffusion into the biophase.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsBronchodilator AgentsChromatography, High Pressure LiquidDrug InteractionsMaleModels, TheoreticalNorfloxacinRatsRats, Sprague-DawleySeizuresTheophyllineAnti-Infective AgentsBronchodilator AgentsNorfloxacinTheophylline

Identifiers

PMID11883649
OpenAlexW67404996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.