Selection of Suitable Prodrug Candidates for in vivo Studies via in vitro Studies; The Correlation of Prodrug Stability in Between Cell Culture Homogenates and Human Tissue Homogenates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the correlations/discrepancies of drug stabilities between in the homogenates of human culture cells and of human tissues. METHODS: Amino acid/dipeptide monoester prodrugs of floxuridine were chosen as the model drugs. The stabilities (half-lives) of floxuridine prodrugs in human tissues (pancreas, liver, and small intestine) homogenates were obtained and compared with ones in cell culture homogenates (AcPC-1, Capan-2, and Caco-2 cells) as well as human liver microsomes. The correlations of prodrug stability in human small bowel tissue homogenate vs. Caco-2 cell homogenate, human liver tissue homogenate vs. human liver microsomes, and human pancreatic tissue homogenate vs. pancreatic cell, AsPC-1 and Capan-2, homogenates were examined. RESULTS: The stabilities of floxuridine prodrugs in human small bowel homogenate exhibited the great correlation to ones in Caco-2 cell homogenate (slope = 1.0-1.3, r2 = 0.79-0.98). The stability of those prodrugs in human pancreas tissue homogenate also exhibited the good correlations to ones in AsPC-1 and Capan-2 cells homogenates (slope = 0.5-0.8, r2 = 0.58-0.79). However, the correlations of prodrug stabilities between in human liver tissue homogenates and in human liver microsomes were weaker than others (slope = 1.3-1.9, r2 = 0.07-0.24). CONCLUSIONS: The correlations of drug stabilities in cultured cell homogenates and in human tissue homogenates were compared. Those results exhibited wide range of correlations between in cell homogenate and in human tissue homogenate (r2 = 0.07 - 0.98). Those in vitro studies in cell homogenates would be good tools to predict drug stabilities in vivo and to select drug candidates for further developments. In the series of experiments, 5'-O-D-valyl-floxuridine and 5'-O-L-phenylalanyl-L-tyrosyl-floxuridine would be selected as candidates of oral drug targeting delivery for cancer chemotherapy due to their relatively good stabilities compared to other tested prodrugs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".