Skip to main content
Log in

A comparison of the pharmacokinetics of 14C-labelled APD and 99mTc-labelled APD in the mouse

  • Rapid Communications
  • Published:
Calcified Tissue International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Fleisch H. Diphosphonates: history and mechanisms of action. Metab Bone Dis & Rel Res. 3:279–288 (1981)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Recker RR and Saville PD. Intestinal absorption of disodium ethane-1-hydroxy-1, 1-diphosphonate (disodium etidronate) using a deconvolution technique. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 24: 580–589 (1973)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bigler RE, Rosen G, Tofe AJ, Russ GA, Francis MD, Benua RS, Woodard HQ and Kostick JA. Comparative distribution of P-32 and Tc-99m diphosphonates in patients with osteogenic sarcoma. J Nucl Med 17:548 (1976) [Abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fogelman I, Smith L, Mazess R, Wilson MA, and Bevan JA. Absorption of oral diphosphonate in normal subjects. Clin Endocrinol 24:57–62 (1986)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Libson K, Deutsch E and Barnett BL. Structural characterization of a 99Tc-diphosphonate complex. Implications for the chemistry of99mTc skeletal imaging agents. J Am Chem Soc. 102: 2476–8 (1980)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Daley-Yates, P.T., Bennett, R. A comparison of the pharmacokinetics of 14C-labelled APD and 99mTc-labelled APD in the mouse. Calcif Tissue Int 43, 125–127 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02555158

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02555158

Keywords

Navigation