Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31215676›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2019

Reduced bioavailability of oral amoxicillin tablets compared to suspensions in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass bariatric subjects.

Maiara Camotti Montanha, Thiago Ferreira Dos Santos Magon, Conrado de Souza Alcantara, Caroline Ferraz Simões, Sandra Regina Bin Silva, Cristina Megumi Kuroda, Sérgio Seiji Yamada, Lucas Eduardo Savóia de Oliveira, Daoud Nasser, Nelson Nardo Junior and 4 more

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

14 authors.

Maiara Camotti MontanhaPostgraduate Program in Biosciences and Physiopathology (PBF), Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2078-360X
Thiago Ferreira Dos Santos MagonPostgraduate Program in Food Science (PPC), Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Conrado de Souza AlcantaraPostgraduate Program in Biosciences and Physiopathology (PBF), Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Caroline Ferraz SimõesPostgraduate Program in Physical Education, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Sandra Regina Bin SilvaClinical Research Centre and Bioequivalence Studies, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Cristina Megumi KurodaClinical Research Centre and Bioequivalence Studies, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Sérgio Seiji YamadaClinical Research Centre and Bioequivalence Studies, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Lucas Eduardo Savóia de OliveiraClinical Research Centre and Bioequivalence Studies, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Daoud NasserClinical Research Centre and Bioequivalence Studies, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Nelson Nardo JuniorDepartment of Physical Education, Centre for Multiprofessional Studies of Obesity (NEMO), Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Josmar MazucheliDepartment of Statistics, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Andrea DinizDepartment of Pharmacy, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Paulo Jorge Pereira Alves PaixãoDepartment of Pharmacy, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Elza KimuraPostgraduate Program in Biosciences and Physiopathology (PBF), Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo evaluate the relative bioavailability of oral amoxicillin (AMX) tablets in comparison to AMX suspension in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass bariatric subjects.

methodsA randomized, double-blind, cross-over study was performed on the bioavailability of oral AMX tablets and suspension in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass subjects operated at least 3 months previously . Doses of 875 mg of the AMX tablet or 800 mg of the AMX suspension were given to all the subjects, allowing a washout of 7 days between the periods. Blood samples were collected at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours after drug administration and the AMX levels were quantified by liquid chromatography coupled with triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometry. The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by noncompartmental analysis, normalized to an 875 mg dose and the bioavailability of the AMX from the tablets was compared to that from the suspension formulation.

resultsTwenty subjects aged 42.65 ± 7.21 years and with a body mass index of 29.88 ± 4.36 kg/m

conclusionThe tablets presented a lower bioavailability than the suspension formulation and the total absorbed amount of AMX in these subjects was lower in comparison to the standard AMX absorption rates in nonbariatric subjects, regardless of the formulation.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdultAmoxicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsArea Under CurveBiological AvailabilityCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodFemaleGastric BypassHumansMaleMiddle AgedSuspensionsTabletsAmoxicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsSuspensionsTabletsamoxicillingastric bypasspharmacokineticrelative bioavailability

Identifiers

PMID31215676
PMCPMC6710508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.