MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1955853807 · doi:10.1002/bmc.2741

LC‐MS/MS method for simultaneous analysis of uracil, 5,6‐dihydrouracil, 5‐fluorouracil and 5‐fluoro‐5,6‐dihydrouracil in human plasma for therapeutic drug monitoring and toxicity prediction in cancer patients

2012· article· en· W1955853807 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Büchel, Peter Rhyn, Stefan Schürch, Claudia Bühr, Ursula Amstutz, Carlo R. Largiadèr

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Chromatography · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsChemistryFormic acidChromatographyTherapeutic drug monitoringUracilAmmonium acetateDihydropyrimidine dehydrogenaseSelected reaction monitoringAnalyteHigh-performance liquid chromatographyFluorouracilQuantitative analysis (chemistry)Therapeutic indexPharmacokineticsMass spectrometryTandem mass spectrometryDrugPharmacologyCancerBiochemistryThymidylate synthaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chemotherapeutic drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is widely used for treating solid tumors. Response to 5-FU treatment is variable with 10-30% of patients experiencing serious toxicity partly explained by reduced activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). DPD converts endogenous uracil (U) into 5,6-dihydrouracil (UH(2) ), and analogously, 5-FU into 5-fluoro-5,6-dihydrouracil (5-FUH(2) ). Combined quantification of U and UH(2) with 5-FU and 5-FUH(2) may provide a pre-therapeutic assessment of DPD activity and further guide drug dosing during therapy. Here, we report the development of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay for simultaneous quantification of U, UH(2) , 5-FU and 5-FUH(2) in human plasma. Samples were prepared by liquid-liquid extraction with 10:1 ethyl acetate-2-propanol (v/v). The evaporated samples were reconstituted in 0.1% formic acid and 10 μL aliquots were injected into the HPLC system. Analyte separation was achieved on an Atlantis dC(18) column with a mobile phase consisting of 1.0 mm ammonium acetate, 0.5 mm formic acid and 3.3% methanol. Positively ionized analytes were detected by multiple reaction monitoring. The analytical response was linear in the range 0.01-10 μm for U, 0.1-10 μm for UH(2) , 0.1-75 μm for 5-FU and 0.75-75 μm for 5-FUH(2) , covering the expected concentration ranges in plasma. The method was validated following the FDA guidelines and applied to clinical samples obtained from ten 5-FU-treated colorectal cancer patients. The present method merges the analysis of 5-FU pharmacokinetics and DPD activity into a single assay representing a valuable tool to improve the efficacy and safety of 5-FU-based chemotherapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical ChromatographySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207