ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2022
Alfaxalone population pharmacokinetics in the rat: Model application for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic design in inbred and outbred strains and sexes.
Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alfaxalone-Based Anesthetic Combinations to Minimize Anesthesia-Induced Transient Lens Opacity in Rats (Rattus norvegicus).Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026Article
- Alfaxalone as a Total Intravenous Anesthesia Protocol in New Zealand White Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) Improves Cardiovascular Stability Compared to Isoflurane.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2025Article
- Alfaxalone population pharmacokinetics in the rat: Model application for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic design in inbred and outbred strains and sexes.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The translation of new injectable anesthetic drugs from rodent to humans remains slow, despite the realization that reliance on the volatile agents is unsustainable from an environmental perspective. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of rat sex and strain on the PK and PD of the anesthetic neurosteroid alfaxalone. Forty rats had cannulas inserted under isoflurane anesthesia for drug administration and sampling. Carotid artery blood samples were collected for blood gas analysis, hematology, biochemistry, and plasma concentrations of alfaxalone. Plasma samples were assayed using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Compartmental non-linear mixed effects methods (NLME) models were applied to two rat populations to determine whether body weight, sex, and strain influenced PK parameters. There were significant differences between the sexes for plasma clearance, half-life and mean residence time in Lewis rats, and mean arterial blood pressure was significantly lower in the female rats at 120 min. An initial NLME PK population model was used to design an adjusted alfaxalone infusion for SD females matching plasma concentrations in males and minimizing cardiopulmonary depression but maintaining an appropriate hypnotic effect. A final NLME population model showed that alfaxalone clearance was dependent on both bodyweight and sex, whereas volume of distribution was influenced by strain. NLME PK models offer the advantage of having a single model that describes a population and therefore shares data interpretation between animals unlike the standard deterministic PK approach. This approach can be used to propose bespoke dosing regimens for optimal use of alfaxalone.
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.