Comparative Study of Hop-Containing Products on Human Cytochrome P450-Mediated Metabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential for 15 different ales (6), ciders (2 apple and 1 pear), and porters (6) and 2 non-alcoholic products to affect cytochrome P450 (CYP)-mediated biotransformation and P-glycoprotein-mediated efflux of rhodamine was examined. As in our previous study, a wide range of recovered nonvolatile suspended solids dry weights were noted. Aliquots were also found to have varying effects on biotransformation and efflux. Distinct differences in product ability to affect the safety and efficacy of therapeutic products confirmed our initial findings that some porters (stouts) have a potential to affect the safety and efficacy of health products metabolized by CYP2D6 and CYP3A4 isozymes. Most products, except 2 of the ciders and the 2 non-alcoholic products, also have the potential to affect the safety of CYP2C9 metabolized medications and supplements. Further studies are required to determine the clinical significance of these findings.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".