ArticleEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics2015
Comparative study on pharmacokinetics of a series of anticholinergics, atropine, anisodamine, anisodine, scopolamine and tiotropium in rats.
Article in European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, 2015. 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, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Article
- Structure-Tissue Exposure/Selectivity Relationship (STR) on Carbamates of Cannabidiol.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Comparative pharmacokinetic study of Anisodamine Hydrobromide tablets and injection in septic acute lung injury rats.Bioanalysis · 2024Article
- Effects of chronic tramadol administration on cognitive flexibility in mice.Psychopharmacology · 2021Article
- Effects of Anisodine Hydrobromide on the Cardiovascular and Respiratory Functions in Conscious Dogs.Drug design, development and therapy · 2020Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The compound series of traditional anticholinergics [atropine (Atr), anisodamine (Ani), anisodine (AT3), and scopolamine (Sco)], naturally occurring belladonna alkaloid, have been approved for numerous therapeutic uses since 1970s. Tiotropium, a novel M receptor antagonist for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was structurally modified based on atropine-like drugs. Clinical phenomena suggested that the changes of substituent group were related to the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the agents. In an attempt to compare the pharmacokinetics of the series of anticholinergics and investigate the subsets motivating selective anticholinergic potencies, a sensitive LC-MS/MS method was established to analyze the differences of pharmacokinetic parameters. In this paper, we determined the pharmacokinetics of atropine, anisodamine, anisodine, scopolamine, and tiotropium after i.v. and i.g. single dose administration. After i.v. administration, the maximum drug plasma concentrations (C max) of Atr, Ani, AT3, and Sco were 274.25 ± 53.66, 267.50 ± 33.16, 340.50 ± 44.52, and 483.75 ± 78.13 ng/mL. Tiotropium had a slightly higher area under the curve with a significant increase of C max value. Because of their partial solubility, Atr, Ani, AT3, and Sco had different bioavailability in rats of 21.62, 10.78, 80.45 and 2.52 %, respectively. Following i.g. administration of tiotropium, the C max value below 20 ng/mL revealed the very low oral absorption. The urinary excretion rates of Atr, Ani, AT3, Sco and tiotropium were 11.33, 54.86, 32.67, 8.69 and 73.91 %. This work provided relatively comprehensive preclinical data on the series of anticholinergics, which may be used to explain the clinical adverse effects and applications.
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.