Milk Transfer and Neonatal Safety of Tacrolimus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report the first case of tacrolimus measurement in human milk following maternal dosing in a woman who breast-fed while taking the medication. CASE REPORT: A 32-year-old white woman who had taken tacrolimus 0.1 mg/kg/d throughout pregnancy contacted the Motherisk Program at 35 weeks' gestation inquiring about the safety of breast-feeding during maternal tacrolimus therapy. After benefit-risk assessment, the mother decided to breast-feed the baby. METHODS: Manually expressed milk samples were collected over 12 hours following the first tacrolimus dose of the day; pre-dosing and 1-hour post-dosing blood concentrations were also determined. The samples were analyzed for tacrolimus by tandem-mass spectrometry. Breast milk and blood samples were collected at steady-state. RESULTS: The highest and mean concentrations of tacrolimus in milk were 0.57 and 0.429 ng/mL, respectively. From these measurements, the exclusively breast-fed infant would ingest, on average, 0.06 micro g/kg/d, which corresponds to 0.06% of the mother's weight-adjusted dose. Given the low oral bioavailability of tacrolimus, the maximum amount the baby would receive is 0.02% of the mother's weight-adjusted dose. The milk-to-blood ratios of tacrolimus at pre-dosing and 1-hour post-dosing concentrations were calculated to be 0.08 and 0.09, respectively. At 2.5 months of age, the infant was developing well both physically and neurologically. COMMENT: This report is the first to measure tacrolimus concentrations in established human milk using tandem-mass spectrometry to detect drug while the infant was exclusively breast-fed by the mother, and in which the infant's growth and development were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that maternal therapy with tacrolimus for liver transplant may be compatible with breast-feeding.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".