ArticleBMC veterinary research2023
Development of an amoxicillin-radix scutellaria extract formulation and evaluation of its pharmacokinetics in pigs.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics Evaluation of Amoxicillin AgainstPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A pilot pharmacokinetic and Metabolite identification study of Erinacine A in a Single landrace pig model.Heliyon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA new antibacterial compound powder of amoxicillin (AMO)/Radix Scutellaria extract (RSE) was developed, and its pharmacokinetics were determined in pigs following oral administration.
resultsThe MIC ranges of AMO against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus were 1-8 μg/mL, 0.5-4 μg/mL and 0.5-64 μg/mL, respectively. The MIC ranges of RSE against E. coli, S. aureus, and Streptococcus were greater than 2.5 mg/mL, 0.156-2.5 mg/mL, and greater than 2.5 mg/mL, respectively. For S. aureus, the combined drug susceptibility test showed that AMO and RSE had an additive or synergistic effect. The results of compatibility test, the excipient screening test and the drug quality control test showed that the formulation had stable quality and uniform properties under the test conditions. Two studies were conducted to investigate the pharmacokinetics of the compound product in pigs. First, the pharmacokinetics of the AMO-RSE powder were compared with those of their respective single products. The results showed no significant change in the main pharmacokinetic parameters when either component was removed from the compound formulation; thus, AMO and RSE have no pharmacokinetic interaction in pigs. Second, pigs were orally administered three different doses of AMO-RSE powder. The Cmax and AUC increased proportionally with increasing p.o. dose; thus, the λ
conclusionsThe combined drug sensitivity test of AMO and RSE against S. aureus showed that the combination was additive or synergistic. Pharmacokinetic studies indicated that AMO and BCL do not interfere with each other in pigs when used in a compound formulation. The pharmacokinetic parameters remained unchanged regardless of the dose for p.o. administration, indicating linear pharmacokinetic properties over the tested dose range. The quality of the AMO-RSE powder was good and stable, providing a foundation for its clinical application in veterinary medicine. Further bioavailability, PK/PD and clinical trials are still needed to determine the final dosage regimen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.