ArticleBiochemical pharmacology2019
Mechanisms of gemcitabine oral absorption as determined by in situ intestinal perfusions in mice.
Article in Biochemical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual Stimuli-Responsive Gemcitabine-Conjugated Alginate-Chitosan Nanoparticles for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Therapy: A Smart Approach.Bioconjugate chemistry · 2025Article
- Oleandrin: A Systematic Review of its Natural Sources, Structural Properties, Detection Methods, Pharmacokinetics and Toxicology.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
- Permeability of Gemcitabine and PBPK Modeling to Assess Oral Administration.Current issues in molecular biology · 2021Article
- Tri-2-Hydroxyarachidonein Induces Cytocidal Autophagy in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Cancer Cell Models.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Pharmacokinetics of gemcitabine and its amino acid ester prodrug following intravenous and oral administrations in mice.Biochemical pharmacology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Gemcitabine is a widely used chemotherapeutic drug that is administered via intravenous infusion due to a low oral bioavailability of only 10%. This low oral bioavailability is believed to be the result of gemcitabine's low intestinal permeability and oral absorption, followed by significant presystemic metabolism. In the present study, we sought to define the mechanisms of gemcitabine intestinal permeability, the potential for saturation of intestinal uptake, and the transporter(s) responsible for mediating the oral absorption of drug using in situ single-pass intestinal perfusions in mice. Concentration-dependent studies were performed for gemcitabine over 0.5-2000 μM, along with studies of 5 μM gemcitabine in a sodium-containing buffer ± thymidine (which can inhibit concentrative (i.e., CNT1 and CNT3) and equilibrative (i.e., ENT1 and ENT2) nucleoside transporters) or dilazep (which can inhibit ENT1 and ENT2), or in a sodium-free buffer (which can inhibit CNT1 and CNT3). Our findings demonstrated that gemcitabine was, in fact, a high-permeability drug in the intestine at low concentrations, that jejunal uptake of gemcitabine was saturable and mediated almost exclusively by nucleoside transporters, and that jejunal flux was mediated by both high-affinity, low-capacity (K
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.