MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074490490 · doi:10.1021/tx800251p

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy as a Quantitative Tool To Determine the Concentrations of Biologically Produced Metabolites: Implications in Metabolites in Safety Testing

2008· article· en· W2074490490 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Espina, Linning Yu, Jianyao Wang, Zeen Tong, Sarvesh C. Vashishtha, Rasmy Talaat, JoAnn Scatina, Abdul Mutlib

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Research in Toxicology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaboliteMetabolomicsNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyQuantitative analysis (chemistry)Mass spectrometryChemistryProton NMRChromatographyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy has traditionally been considered as an indispensable tool in elucidating structures of metabolites. With the advent of Fourier transform (FT) spectrometers, along with improvements in software and hardware (such as high-field magnets, cryoprobes, versatile pulse sequences, and solvent suppression techniques), NMR is increasingly being considered as a critical quantitative tool, despite its lower sensitivity as compared to mass spectrometry. A specific quantitative application of NMR is in determining the concentrations of biologically isolated metabolites, which could potentially be used as reference standards for further quantitative work by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. With the recent demands from regulatory agencies on quantitative information on metabolites, it is proposed that NMR will play a significant role in strategies aimed at addressing metabolite coverage in toxicological species. Traditionally, biologically isolated metabolites have not been considered as a way of generating "reference standards" for further quantitative work. However, because of the recent FDA guidance on safety testing of metabolites, one has to consider means of authenticating and quantitating biologically or nonbiologically generated metabolites. 1H NMR is being proposed as the method of choice, as it is able to be used as both a qualitative and a quantitative tool, hence allowing structure determination, purity check, and quantitative measurement of the isolated metabolite. In this publication, the application of NMR as a powerful and robust analytical technique in determining the concentrations of in vitro or in vivo isolated metabolites is discussed. Furthermore, to demonstrate the reliability and accuracy of metabolite concentrations determined by NMR, validation and cross-validation with gravimetric and mass spectrometric methods were conducted.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
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

Citations113
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Research in ToxicologySame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207