1995
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1995.278
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An evaluation of hepatic extraction and clearance of doxorubicin

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
17
0

Year Published

1995
1995
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
3
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mean systemic CL T values were consistently higher and t b values lower with HAI of doxorubicin, re¯ecting the supplemental clearance of drug by HVDE. This is not surprising, given the increase in hepatic doxorubicin extraction ratios (from 50±72% to 75±91%) previously reported with this method of doxorubicin administration [5,27]. Mean systemic CL T was signi®cantly increased with HAI/HVDE at the 5 mg/kg dose, although there were no signi®cant dierences in mean systemic t b values.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…Mean systemic CL T values were consistently higher and t b values lower with HAI of doxorubicin, re¯ecting the supplemental clearance of drug by HVDE. This is not surprising, given the increase in hepatic doxorubicin extraction ratios (from 50±72% to 75±91%) previously reported with this method of doxorubicin administration [5,27]. Mean systemic CL T was signi®cantly increased with HAI/HVDE at the 5 mg/kg dose, although there were no signi®cant dierences in mean systemic t b values.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…“Remote” samples of the liver (in areas far from the ablation and therefore not subject to hyperthermia) in our study were consistently about 5 μg/g. The absolute concentration values measured in the current study were considerably larger than in this prior modelling study, possibly in part due to the fact that normal liver tissue (vessel structure, stromal cells, interstitial pressure etc.,) is very different from tumor tissue and takes up doxorubicin very rapidly [ 34 ] compared to the tumor cells considered in the computer model [ 6 , 35 ]. The doxorubicin concentrations were consistently increased in the surrounding tissue volume, however with asymmetric distribution, most likely associated with variations in vascularity of liver tissue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the purpose of pharmacokinetic analysis, the data were treated as an intravenous bolus administration. In order to perform the curve fitting and calculation of the area under the time-concentration curve (AUC), the time concentration files were uploaded into Kaleidagraph (Synergy Software, Reading, PA) (9). In Kaleidagraph, the time-concentration curves were graphicallly displayed and the elimination portion of the time-concentration curves fit to a two compartment, exponential elimination equation: y =Ae -␣t + Be -␤t where A represents the y intercept of the first phase or redistributive phase, B represents the y intercept of the first order terminal phase, ␣ represents the slope of the first phase and ␤ represents the slope of the terminal phase (10).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Kaleidagraph, the time-concentration curves were graphicallly displayed and the elimination portion of the time-concentration curves fit to a two compartment, exponential elimination equation: y =Ae -␣t + Be -␤t where A represents the y intercept of the first phase or redistributive phase, B represents the y intercept of the first order terminal phase, ␣ represents the slope of the first phase and ␤ represents the slope of the terminal phase (10). ␤ is considered equivalent to the elimination rate constant, k. The curves were intergrated using Kaleidagraph employing a modified trapezoidal rule for a user defined number of points between times 0 and the final measured concentration of thrombostatin within the linear portion of the curve (9). The segment of the AUC from the final measured concentration to infinity was estimated by the following equation: C*/k where C*= the final measured concentration and k = the elimination rate constant.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%