ArticleMolecular pharmaceutics2015
Response to "comment on 'structural determinants of drug partitioning in surrogates of phosphatidylcholine bilayer strata'".
Article in Molecular pharmaceutics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
We used the solvatochromic correlation to explain the influence of characteristics of studied compounds on the partition coefficients (P) measured using n-hexadecane (C16) and the novel headgroup surrogate (diacetyl phosphatidylcholine, DAcPC), and compared them with those in other systems, including the C16/water (W) system. The comment analyzes why our correlation for the C16/W system has the standard deviation (SD) higher than that published previously. The main reason is that in our, much smaller, data set the measured P values are complemented by the P values predicted by a reliable, unrelated method. We believe that this approach is acceptable for the aforementioned comparison. We did not use just experimental values, as suggested in the comment, because the solvatochromic correlation, although exhibiting 35% reduction in the SD, was accompanied by a sign change of one of the regression coefficients. The recommended use of special solvatochromic solute characteristics for a few compounds and replacement of a predicted PC16/W value by the experimental value resulted in improved correlations. The observed differences between our correlation and those published in the comment and in a previous article do not affect our main conclusions regarding the solvation of solutes in the surrogates (DAcPC and C16) of intrabilayer strata.
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.