The Human Placental Perfusion Model: A Systematic Review and Development of a Model to Predict In Vivo Transfer of Therapeutic Drugs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dual perfusion of a single placental lobule is the only experimental model to study human placental transfer of substances in organized placental tissue. To date, there has not been any attempt at a systematic evaluation of this model. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the perfusion model in predicting placental drug transfer and to develop a pharmacokinetic model to account for nonplacental pharmacokinetic parameters in the perfusion results. In general, the fetal-to-maternal drug concentration ratios matched well between placental perfusion experiments and in vivo samples taken at the time of delivery of the infant. After modeling for differences in maternal and fetal/neonatal protein binding and blood pH, the perfusion results were able to accurately predict in vivo transfer at steady state (R² = 0.85, P < 0.0001). Placental perfusion experiments can be used to predict placental drug transfer when adjusting for extra parameters and can be useful for assessing drug therapy risks and benefits in pregnancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it