MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000442643 · doi:10.1021/mp300502m

Establishing the Pharmaceutical Quality of Chinese Herbal Medicine: A Provisional BCS Classification

2013· article· en· W2000442643 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Pharmaceutics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacological Effects of Natural Compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopharmaceuticalBiopharmaceutics Classification SystemPharmacopoeiaQuality assessmentActive ingredientStandardizationSolubilityClass (philosophy)Traditional medicineMedicineDrugComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePharmacologyChemistryBiotechnologyAlternative medicineExternal quality assessmentBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS), which is a scientific approach to categorize active drug ingredient based on its solubility and intestinal permeability into one of the four classes, has been used to set the pharmaceutical quality standards for drug products in western society. However, it has received little attention in the area of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM). This is likely, in part, due to the presence of multiple active components as well as lack of standardization of CHM. In this report, we apply BCS classification to CHMs provisionally as a basis for establishing improved in vitro quality standards. Based on a top-200 drugs selling list in China, a total of 31 CHM products comprising 50 official active marker compounds (AMCs) were provisionally classified according to BCS. Information on AMC content and doses of these CHM products were retrieved from the Chinese Pharmacopoeia. BCS parameters including solubility and permeability of the AMCs were predicted in silico (ACD/Laboratories). A BCS classification of CHMs according to biopharmaceutical properties of their AMCs is demonstrated to be feasible in the current study and can be used to provide a minimum set of quality standards. Our provisional results showed that 44% of the included AMCs were classified as Class III (high solubility, low permeability), followed by Class II (26%), Class I (18%), and Class IV (12%). A similar trend was observed when CHMs were classified in accordance with the BCS class of AMCs. Most (45%) of the included CHMs were classified as Class III, followed by Class II (16%), Class I (10%), and Class IV (6%); whereas 23% of the CHMs were of mixed class due to the presence of multiple individual AMCs with different BCS classifications. Moreover, about 60% of the AMCs were classified as high-solubility compounds (Class I and Class III), suggesting an important role for an in vitro dissolution test in setting quality control standards ensuring consistent biopharmaceutical quality for the commercially available CHM products. That is, provisionally, more than half of the AMCs of the top-selling CHMs included in this study would be candidates for a bioequivalence (BE) biowaiver, based on WHO recommendations and EMEA guidelines. Thus a dissolution requirement on these AMCs would represent a significant advance in the pharmaceutical quality of CHM today.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.168
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.337 · 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