<scp>PKPD</scp>modelling to predict altered disposition of 1α,25‐dihydroxyvitamin<scp>D</scp><sub>3</sub>in mice due to dose‐dependent regulation of<scp>CYP27B1</scp>on synthesis and<scp>CYP24A1</scp>on degradation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Concentrations of 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 [1,25(OH)2 D3 ], the active ligand of the vitamin D receptor, are tightly regulated by CYP27B1 for synthesis and CYP24A1 for degradation. However, the dose-dependent pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) relationship between these enzymes and 1,25(OH)2 D3 concentrations has not been characterized. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: The pharmacokinetics of 1,25(OH)2 D3 were evaluated after administration of single (2, 60 and 120 pmol) and repeated (2 and 120 pmol q2d ×3) i.v. doses to male C57BL/6 mice. mRNA expression of CYP27B1 and CYP24A1 was examined by quantitative PCR and 1,25(OH)2 D3 concentrations were determined by enzyme immunoassay. KEY RESULTS: CYP27B1 and CYP24A1 changes were absent for the 2 pmol dose and biexponential decay profiles showed progressively shorter terminal half-lives with increasing doses. Fitting with a two-compartment model revealed decreasing net synthesis rates and increasing total clearances with dose, consistent with a dose-dependent down-regulation of renal CYP27B1 and the induction of renal/intestinal CYP24A1 mRNA expression. Upon incorporation of PD parameters for inhibition of CYP27B1 and induction of CYP24A1 to the simple two-compartment model, fitting was significantly improved. Moreover, fitted estimates for the 2 pmol dose, together with the PD parameters as modifiers, were able to predict profiles reasonably well for the higher (60 and 120 pmol) doses. Lastly, an indirect response model, which considered the synthesis and degradation of enzymes, adequately described the PK and PD profiles. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The unique PK of exogenously administered 1,25(OH)2 D3 led to changes in PD of CYP27B1 and CYP24A1, which hastened the clearance of 1,25(OH)2 D3 .
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".