ArticleEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics2014
A comparison of in vitro ADME properties and pharmacokinetics of azithromycin and selected 15-membered ring macrolides in rodents.
Article in European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- PBPK Modeling of Azithromycin Systemic Exposure in a Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Surgery Patient Population.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Effect of Administration of Azithromycin and/or Probiotic Bacteria on Bones of Estrogen-Deficient Rats.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of structural modifications on the 15-membered macrolactone ring and/or substituents on the in vitro ADME properties and in vivo pharmacokinetic (PK) profile for selected derivatives in rodents in comparison to azithromycin. Azithromycin and seven selected 15-membered macrolide derivatives, modified either by removal of the sugar moieties, replacement of the amine with a lactam, or addition of lipophilic substituents, were screened in several in vitro ADME assays and in vivo PK studies in rodents. In vitro ADME profiling included assessment of passive permeability and P-gp substrate, metabolic stability in liver microsomes and hepatocytes, as well as CYP direct inhibition measurements. In vivo PK studies were performed in rats (Sprague-Dawley), mice (Balb/c), and P-gp wild-type and deficient mice (CF-1™). Different structural modifications on the azithromycin scaffold resulted in substantial changes in disposition kinetics and oral bioavailability in both rodent species. However, these differences in vivo cannot be predicted based on in vitro results since most of these molecules are classified in the same category. Therefore, in the case of 15-membered ring macrolides, the in vitro ADME screens presented here seem to have low predictive value for in vivo prediction, making their use as routine in vitro screens prior to PK assessments questionable.
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.