Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of dextroketamine alone or combined with midazolam in Caiman crocodilus.

Pharmacokinetics studies of anesthetic agents are important for understanding of the pharmacology and metabolism of anesthetic agents in reptilians. This study was designed to examine the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of intravenous dextroketamine alone or combined with midazolam in Caiman crocodilus. Eight caimans were anesthetized with dextroketamine (10 mg/kg; group D) or dextroketamine and midazolam (10 and 0.5 mg/kg respectively; group DM) into the occipital venous sinus. The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by HPLC using a non-compartmental modeling. Serial blood samples were collected at baseline and within 15 and 30 min, and 11.5, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48 h of drug administration. Sedation status over time differed between groups. All animals in group D (8/8; 100%) showed signs of light sedation at t10. Half (4/8; 50%) of these caimans did not progress to deeper levels of sedation. In spite of light sedation at t10, animals in group DM were deeply sedated within 13.13 ± 7.04 min of anesthetic agent injection. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-48) and half-life of dextroketamine changed significantly after combination with midazolam. Even without significant changes in clearance, the almost two-fold increase in the half-life of dextroketamine suggests a slower rate of elimination.

In vitro assessment of skin sensitization, photosensitization and phototoxicity potential of commercial glyphosate-containing formulations.

This study evaluated the applicability of a modified Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) (OECD N° 442C, 2015) through the 10-fold reduction of reaction volume (micro-DPRA, mDPRA) for skin sensitization evaluation of six commercial glyphosate-containing formulations. In addition, another modification of DPRA was proposed by adding a UVA (5J/cm2) irradiation step, namely photo-mDPRA, to better characterize (photo)sensitizer materials. The phototoxicity profile of pesticides was also evaluated using the 3T3 Neutral Red Uptake Phototoxicity Test (3T3-NRU-PT) (OECD N° 432, 2004). The mDPRA could represent an environmentally acceptable test approach, since it reduces costs and organic waste. Peptide depletion was greater in photo-mDPRA and changed the reactivity class of each test material, in comparison to mDPRA. Thus, the association of mDPRA with photo-mDPRA was better for correctly characterizing human (photo)sensitizer substances and pesticides. In general, cysteine depletion was greater than that of lysine for all materials tested in both mDPRA and photo-mDPRA. Furthermore, while 3T3-NRU-PT is unable to predict (photo)sensitizers, it was capable of correctly identifying the phototoxic potential of the tested agrochemical formulations. In conclusion, mDPRA plus photo-mDPRA and 3T3-NRU-PT seem to be preliminary non-animal test batteries for skin (photo)sensitization/phototoxicity assessment of chemicals, agrochemical formulations and their ingredients.

In vitro safety and efficacy evaluations of a complex botanical mixture of Eugenia dysenterica DC. (Myrtaceae): Prospects for developing a new dermocosmetic product.

In the context of developing a new natural product-based cosmetic, the in vitro efficacy and safety evaluations of a complex botanical mixture based on Eugenia dysenterica leaf hydroalcoholic extract (EDE) (2.5-1000µg/mL) were carried out. Chromatographic analysis demonstrated the presence of the tannin (ellagic acid) and flavonoids (quercetin and gallic acid) which characterize the EDE as a polyphenol-rich mixture. Using HFF-1 fibroblasts, it was shown that EDE promoted cell regeneration after UVA exposure. It also led to the inhibition of the collagenase, elastase and tyrosinase enzymes, which are involved in skin-related disorders. In terms of toxicological evaluation, the EDE was classified as non-phototoxic through the 3T3 Neutral Red Uptake Phototoxicity Test (OECD N° 432, 2004) and non-eye irritant by Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability (OECD N° 437, 2013) assay, in conjunction with corneal histomorphometric analysis. Furthermore, the EDE has no skin sensitization potential as demonstrated by a two-out-of-three prediction model [protein-binding/haptenization (OECD N° 442C, 2015), keratinocyte and dendritic cell activations]. In addition, it was shown that the EDE seems to be non-genotoxic through the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (OECD N° 487, 2014) using HepG2 cells. When considered together, these findings support the use of EDE botanical mixture in cosmetic/pharmaceutical products.