The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pharmacokinetics and Bioavailability of Mycophenolate Mofetil in Healthy Subjects after Single‐Dose Oral and Intravenous Administration
Abstract
A randomized, crossover study of 12 healthy volunteers was conducted with single, 1.5‐g doses of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), a prodrug of mycophenolic acid (MPA), after oral and intravenous administration. During the intravenous infusion, phase systemic plasma clearance of MMF was ∼10 L/min and the half‐life (t 1/2) was a few minutes. After oral administration, however, plasma MMF was below quantitation limits at all times. The plasma MPA profile of oral MMF showed a sharp peak at ∼1 hour and a secondary peak at 8 to 12 hours. Mean apparent plasma t 1/2 of MPA was similar for both routes (∼17 hours). The area under the concentration‐time curve (AUC) from time 0 to 24 hours was statistically higher for intravenous than for oral administration, but total AUC showed statistical equivalence (80–120 rule), with mean bioavailability of MPA from oral administration of MMF estimated as 94.1% relative to the intravenous route. Total plasma AUC of mycophenolic acid glucuronide (MPAG), the sole metabolite of MPA, was four‐ to five‐fold higher than MPA. Total 48‐hour MPAG recovery in urine was statistically equivalent for the two routes and represented a mean of 70% of administered drug; corresponding MPA recovery was less than 1%. Renal clearance (CI r) values required transport mechanisms for MPAG, but not for MPA. The CI R of MPAG was statistically higher after intravenous administration than oral administration. MMF administered orally undergoes rapid, complete absorption and essentially complete presystemic deesterification. There was presystemic removal of MPA, but enterohepatic circulation compensated for the first pass loss. Renal metabolism of MPA also may have occurred.
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
Schuirmann, D. J. (1987) · Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics · doi:10.1007/bf01068419 · Cited by 2,696
Cited by
Lessons Learned from Marketed and Investigational Prodrugs
Ettmayer, P., Amidon, G. L., Clement, B., & Testa, B. (2004) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm0303812 · Cited by 384
Mechanisms of Clinically Relevant Drug Interactions Associated with Tacrolimus
Christians, U., Jacobsen, W., Benet, L. Z., & Lampen, A. (2002) · Clinical Pharmacokinetics · doi:10.2165/00003088-200241110-00003 · Cited by 323
Enteric coating of oral solid dosage forms as a tool to improve drug bioavailability
Maderuelo, C., Lanao, J. M., & Zarzuelo, A. (2019) · European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ejps.2019.105019 · Cited by 147
Metadata
- Authors
- Bullingham, R., Monroe, S., Nicholls, A., & Hale, M.
- Venue
- The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-04
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 315-324
- ISSN
- 0021-9754 (ISSN-L)
- 0091-2700
- 1552-4604
- OpenAlex
- W2009406967
- Cited by
- 318
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.73
- 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: Pharmacokinetics and Bioavailability of Mycophenolate Mofetil in Healthy Subjects after Single‐Dose Oral and Intravenous Administration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1996.tb04207.x
- The paper
- Bullingham, R., Monroe, S., Nicholls, A., & Hale, M. (1996). Pharmacokinetics and Bioavailability of Mycophenolate Mofetil in Healthy Subjects after Single‐Dose Oral and Intravenous Administration. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1996.tb04207.x
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.