ArticlePulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics2014
Airway drug pharmacokinetics via analysis of exhaled breath condensate.
Article in Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of a method for estimating pulmonary dead space in ventilated beagles to correct exhaled propofol concentration in mixed air.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Exhaled Breath Condensate (EBC): Is It a Viable Source of Biomarkers for Lung Diseases?Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2020Review
- A new hypothesis to investigate bioequivalence of pharmaceutical inhalation products.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2019Article
- Variability of the Sheep Lung Microbiota.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2016Article
- Exhaled Breath Condensate: Technical and Diagnostic Aspects.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2015Review
- Potentiator ivacaftor abrogates pharmacological correction of ΔF508 CFTR in cystic fibrosis.Science translational medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Although the airway surface is the anatomic target for many lung disease therapies, measuring drug concentrations and activities on these surfaces poses considerable challenges. We tested whether mass spectrometric analysis of exhaled breath condensate (EBC) could be utilized to non-invasively measure airway drug pharmacokinetics and predicted pharmacological activities. Mass spectrometric methods were developed to detect a novel epithelial sodium channel blocker (GS-9411/P-680), two metabolites, a chemically related internal standard, plus naturally occurring solutes including urea as a dilution marker. These methods were then applied to EBC and serum collected from four (Floridian) sheep before, during and after inhalation of nebulized GS-9411/P-680. Electrolyte content of EBC and serum was also assessed as a potential pharmacodynamic marker of drug activity. Airway surface concentrations of drug, metabolites, and electrolytes were calculated from EBC measures using EBC:serum urea based dilution factors. GS-9411/P-680 and its metabolites were quantifiable in the sheep EBC, with peak airway concentrations between 1.9 and 3.4 μM measured 1 h after inhalation. In serum, only Metabolite #1 was quantifiable, with peak concentrations ∼60-fold lower than those in the airway (45 nM at 1 h). EBC electrolyte concentrations suggested a pharmacological effect; but this effect was not statistical significant. Analysis of EBC collected during an inhalation drug study provided a method for quantification of airway drug and metabolites via mass spectrometry. Application of this methodology could provide an important tool in development and testing of drugs for airways diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.