Validation and application of a liquid chromatography‐tandem mass spectrometric method for the determination of GDC‐0152 in human plasma using solid‐phase extraction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometric (LC-MS/MS) method was developed and validated for the determination of GDC-0152 in human plasma to support clinical development. The method consisted of a solid-phase extraction for sample preparation and LC-MS/MS analysis in the positive ion mode using TurboIonSpray(TM) for analysis. d(7) -GDC-0152 was used as the internal standard. A linear regression (weighted 1/concentration(2) ) was used to fit calibration curves over the concentration range of 0.02-10.0 ng/mL for GDC-0152. There were no endogenous interference components in the blank human plasma tested. The accuracy at the lower limit of quantitation was 99.3% with a precision (%CV) of 13.9%. For quality control samples at 0.0600, 2.00 and 8.00 ng/mL, the between-run %CV was ≤8.64. Between-run percentage accuracy ranged from 98.2 to 99.6%. GDC-0152 was stable in human plasma for 363 days at -20°C and for 659 days at -70°C storage. GDC-0152 was stable in human plasma at room temperature for up to 25 h and through three freeze-thaw cycles. In whole blood, GDC-0152 was stable for 12 h at 4°C and at ambient temperature. This validated LC-MS/MS method for determination of GDC-0152 was used to support clinical studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it