Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27051418›Full record

ArticleAdvances in pharmacological sciences2016

Pharmacokinetics of Immediate and Sustained Release Cephalexin Administered by Different Routes to Llamas (Lama glama).

Verónica Kreil, Luis Ambros, Ana Paula Prados, Lisa Tarragona, Agustina Monfrinotti, Guillermo Bramuglia, Marcela Rebuelto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in pharmacological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Verónica KreilFarmacología, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Chorroarín 280, 1427 Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Luis AmbrosFarmacología, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Chorroarín 280, 1427 Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Ana Paula PradosFarmacología, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Chorroarín 280, 1427 Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Lisa TarragonaFarmacología, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Chorroarín 280, 1427 Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Agustina MonfrinottiFarmacología, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Chorroarín 280, 1427 Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Guillermo BramugliaFarmacología, Facultad de Farmacia y Bioquímica, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Junín 1100, 1425 Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Marcela RebueltoFarmacología, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Chorroarín 280, 1427 Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.ORCID 0000-0001-9567-1365

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We investigate the pharmacokinetics of two different cephalexin formulations administered to llamas by the intravenous (IV), intramuscular (IM), and subcutaneous (SC) routes, the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of cephalexin against some Escherichia coli and staphylococci isolated from llamas, and we apply the PK/PD modelling approach, so that effective dosage recommendations for this species could be made. Six llamas received immediate (10 mg/kg, IV, IM, and SC) and sustained (8 mg/kg IM, SC) release cephalexin. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by noncompartmental approach. Immediate release SC administration produced a significantly longer elimination half-life as compared with the IV and IM administration (1.3 ± 0.2 versus 0.6 ± 0.1 and 0.6 ± 0.1 h, resp.) and higher mean absorption time as compared with the IM administration (1.7 ± 0.5 versus 0.6 ± 0.4 h). Absolute bioavailability was in the range of 72-89% for both formulations and routes of administration. Cephalexin MIC90 values against staphylococci and E. coli were 1.0 and 8.0 μg/mL, respectively. Our results show that the immediate release formulation (10 mg/kg) would be effective for treating staphylococcal infections administered every 8 h (IM) or 12 h (SC), whereas the sustained release formulation (8 mg/kg) would require the IM or SC administration every 12 or 24 h, respectively.

Identifiers

PMID27051418
PMCPMC4804046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.