MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037647662 · doi:10.1080/15459620590909673

Physiologically Based Modeling of n-Hexane Kinetics in Humans Following Inhalation Exposure at Rest and Under Physical Exertion: Impact on Free 2,5-Hexanedione in Urine and on n-Hexane in Alveolar Air

2005· article· en· W2037647662 on OpenAlexafffund
G. Hamelin, Ginette Charest‐Tardif, Ginette Truchon, Robert Tardif

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travailSante MontrealUniversité de Montréal
FundersInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsInhalationInhalation exposureChemistryPhysiologically based pharmacokinetic modellingPharmacokineticsUrineConfidence intervalToxicokineticsAnimal scienceToxicologyToxicityPharmacologyAnesthesiaInternal medicineMedicineBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used a modified physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) to describe/predict n-hexane (HEX) alveolar air concentrations and free 2,5-HD urinary concentrations in humans exposed to n-HEX by inhalation during a typical workweek. The effect of an increase in workload intensity on these two exposure indicators was assessed and, using Monte Carlo simulation, the impact of biological variability was investigated. The model predicted HEX alveolar air concentrations at rest of 19.0 ppm (25 ppm exposure) and 38.7 ppm (50 ppm exposure) at the end of the last working day (day 5), while free 2,5-HD urinary concentrations of 3.4 micromol/L (25 ppm) and 6.3 micromol/L (50 ppm) were predicted for the same period (last 4.5 hours of Day 5). Monte Carlo simulations showed that the range of values expected to occur in a group of 1000 individuals exposed to 50 ppm of HEX (95% confidence interval) for free 2,5-HD (1.7-14.7 micromol/L) is much higher compared with alveolar air HEX (33.4-46 ppm). Simulations of exposure at 50 ppm with different workloads predicted that an increase in workload intensity would not greatly affect both indicators studied. However, the alveolar air HEX concentration is more sensitive to modifications of workload intensity and time of sampling, after the end of exposure, compared with 2,5-HD. The PBPK model successfully described the HEX alveolar air concentrations and free 2,5-HD urinary concentrations measured in human volunteers and is the first, to our knowledge, to describe the excretion kinetics of free 2,5-HD in humans over a 5-day period.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207