The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pharmacokinetics of Oral and Inhaled Terbutaline after Exercise in Trained Men
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2016.00150 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anders Dyreborg, Nanna Krogh, Vibeke Backer, Sebastian Rzeppa, Peter Hemmersbach, Morten Hostrup |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to investigate pharmacokinetics of terbutaline after oral and inhaled administration in healthy trained male subjects in relation to doping control. Twelve healthy well-trained young men (27 ±2 years; mean ± SE) underwent two pharmacokinetic trials that compared 10 mg oral terbutaline with 4 mg inhaled dry powder terbutaline. During each trial, subjects performed 90 min of bike ergometer exercise at 65% of maximal oxygen consumption. Blood (0-4 h) and urine (0-24 h) samples were collected before and after administration of terbutaline. Samples were analyzed for concentrations of terbutaline by high performance liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS). Pharmacokinetics differed between the two routes of administration. Serum Cmax and area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) were lower after oral administration compared to inhalation (Cmax: 4.2 ± 0.3 vs. 8.5 ± 0.7 ng/ml, P ≤ 0.001; AUC: 422 ± 22 vs. 1308 ± 119 ng/ml × min). Urine concentrations (sum of the free drug and the glucuronide) were lower after oral administration compared to inhalation 2 h (1100 ± 204 vs. 61 ± 10 ng/ml, P ≤ 0.05) and 4 h (734 ± 110 vs. 340 ± 48 ng/ml, P ≤ 0.001) following administration, whereas concentrations were higher for oral administration than inhalation 12 h following administration (190 ± 41 vs. 399 ± 108 ng/ml, P ≤ 0.05). Urine excretion rate was lower after oral administration than inhalation the first 2 h following administration (P ≤ 0.001). Systemic bioavailability ratio between the two routes of administration was 3.8:1 (inhaled: oral; P ≤ 0.001). Given the higher systemic bioavailability of inhaled terbutaline compared to oral, our results indicate that it is difficult to differentiate allowed inhaled use of terbutaline from prohibited oral ingestion based on urine concentrations in doping control analysis. However given the potential performance enhancing effect of high dose terbutaline, it is essential to establish a limit on the WADA doping list. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 24% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 28% |
| Sports and Recreations | 7 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 June 2016.
All research outputs
#21,968,045
of 24,510,033 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#11,779
of 18,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#308,138
of 352,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#74
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,510,033 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 18,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.