ArticleIranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR2010
Comparison of microbiological and high-performance liquid chromatographic methods for determination of clarithromycin levels in plasma.
Article in Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Plasma Tylosin Concentrations: A Comparative Study of Immunoassay, Microbiological Assay, and Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Removal of Azithromycin from Aqueous Solution Using UV- Light Alone and UV Plus Persulfate (UV/Na2S2O8) Processes.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR · 2018Article
- Selection of appropriate analytical tools to determine the potency and bioactivity of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An agar well diffusion bioassay method for determination of clarithromycin in human plasma, using Micrococcus Luteus ATCC 9341 as the assay organism, was compared with a selective high-performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) method with UV detection. Spiked plasma was used to prepare standard and control samples for both methods. The results of the bioassay analyses with spiked plasma samples were concordant by HPLC methods (R(2) =0.871, P < 0.001).The Bland-Altman method also showed good agreement between the results of two methods. HPLC demonstrated an improved precision (0.88-19.86% versus 4.51-26.78%) and accuracy (99.27-103.42 % versus 78.52-131.19 %), compared to those of the bioassay method. The range of linearity obtained by both methods (from 62.5 to 3000 ng/ml for HPLC and from 250 to 3000 ng/ml for the bioassay) includes the range of concentrations of clarithromycin which are considered clinically relevant. However, comparison between HPLC and microbiological assays after oral administration of clarithromycin in healthy volunteers indicated significant differences between the two methods in mean plasma concentration-time profiles. The Bland-Altman method revealed no agreement between the two methods, which can be explained by the presence of active metabolites of clarithromycin in plasma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24363703PMC3862973W1655343078What 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.