The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals
Abstract
In addition to metabolic differences, the anatomical, physiological, and biochemical differences in the gastrointestinal (G.I.) tract of the human and common laboratory animals can cause significant variation in drug absorption from the oral route. Among the physiological factors, pH, bile, pancreatic juice, and mucus and fluid volume and content can modify dissolution rates, solubility, transit times, and membrane transport of drug molecules. The microbial content of the G.I. tract can significantly affect the reductive metabolism and enterohepatic circulation of drugs and colonic delivery of formulations. The transit time of dosage forms can be significantly different between species due to different dimensions and propulsive activities of the G.I. tract. The lipid/protein composition of the enterocyte membrane along the G.I. tract can alter binding and passive, active, and carrier‐mediated transport of drugs. The location and number of Peyer's patches can also be important in the absorption of large molecules and particulate matter. While small animals, rats, mice, guinea pigs, and rabbits, are most suitable for determining the mechanism of drug absorption and bioavailability values from powder or solution formulations, larger animals, dogs, pigs, and monkeys, are used to assess absorption from formulations. The understanding of physiological, anatomical, and biochemical differences between the G.I. tracts of different animal species can lead to the selection of the correct animal model to mimic the bioavailability of compounds in the human. This article reviews the anatomical, physiological, and biochemical differences between the G.I. tracts of humans and commonly used laboratory animals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Neutra, M., Phillips, T., Mayer, E., & Fishkind, D. (1987) · Cell and Tissue Research · doi:10.1007/bf00215747 · Cited by 253
Cited by
Surface area of the digestive tract – revisited
Helander, H. F., & Fändriks, L. (2014) · Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3109/00365521.2014.898326 · Cited by 860
Microbial Ecology along the Gastrointestinal Tract
Hillman, E. T., Lu, H., Yao, T., & Nakatsu, C. H. (2017) · Microbes and environments · doi:10.1264/jsme2.me17017 · Cited by 580
Anatomical and physiological parameters affecting gastrointestinal absorption in humans and rats
DeSesso, J. M., & Jacobson, C. F. (2001) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/s0278-6915(00)00136-8 · Cited by 528
Hua, S. (2020) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2020.00524 · Cited by 527
Oral lipid-based drug delivery systems – an overview
Kalepu, S., Manthina, M., & Padavala, V. (2013) · Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B · doi:10.1016/j.apsb.2013.10.001 · Cited by 494
Metadata
- Authors
- Kararli, T. T.
- Venue
- Biopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-07
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 351-380
- ISSN
- 0142-2782 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-081X
- OpenAlex
- W2018445772
- Cited by
- 1,459
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bdd.2510160502
- The paper
- Kararli, T. T. (1995). Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals. Biopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdd.2510160502
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.