MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092372160 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100003759

A Mathematical Model for Prediction of Drug Molecule Diffusion Across the Blood-Brain Barrier

2004· article· en· W2092372160 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jonathan Burns, Donald F. Weaver

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBarrier Structure and Function Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's University
KeywordsBlood–brain barrierCheminformaticsMathematical modelComputer scienceChemistryNeuroscienceMathematicsComputational chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Predicting the ability of drugs to enter the brain is a longstanding problem in neuropharmacology. The first step in creating a much-needed computational algorithm for predicting whether a drug will enter brain is to devise a rigorous mathematical model. METHODS: Employing two experimental measures of blood-brain barrier (BBB) penetrability (brain/plasma ratio and the brain-uptake index) and 14 theoretically derived biophysical predictors, a mathematical model was developed to quantitatively correlate molecular structure with ability to traverse the BBB. RESULTS: This mathematical model employs Stein's hydrogen bonding number and Randic's topological descriptors to correlate structure with ability to cross the BBB. The final model accurately predicts the ability of test molecules to cross the BBB. CONCLUSIONS: A mathematical method to predict blood-brain barrier penetrability of drug molecules has been successfully devised. As a result of bioinformatics, chemoinformatics and other informatics-based technologies, the number of small molecules being developed as potential therapeutics is increasing exponentially. A biophysically rigorous method to predict BBB penetrability will be a much-needed tool for the evaluation of these molecules.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.236 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicBarrier Structure and Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207