MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559948884 · doi:10.1002/bdd.2051

Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling revealed minimal codeine intestinal metabolism in first‐pass removal in rats

2016· article· en· W2559948884 on OpenAlexaff
Keumhan Noh, Shu Chen, Qi Joy Yang, K. Sandy Pang

Bibliographic record

VenueBiopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsApotex (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysiologically based pharmacokinetic modellingGlucuronidationMorphineCodeineFirst pass effectPharmacologyChemistryPharmacokineticsSmall intestineOpioidLarge intestineBiochemistryMedicineReceptorMicrosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The physiologically based model with segregated flow to the intestine (SFM-PBPK; partial, lower flow to enterocyte region vs. greater flow to serosal region) was found to describe the first-pass glucuronidation of morphine (M) to morphine-3β-glucuronide (MG) in rats after intraduodenal (i.d.) and intravenous (i.v.) administration better than the traditional model (TM), for which a single intestinal flow perfused the whole of the intestinal tissue. The segregated flow model (SFM) described a disproportionately greater extent of intestinal morphine glucuronidation for i.d. vs. i.v. administration. The present study applied the same PBPK modeling approaches to examine the contributions of the intestine and liver on the first-pass metabolism of the precursor, codeine (C, 3-methylmorphine) in the rat. Unexpectedly, the profiles of codeine, morphine and morphine-3β-glucuronide in whole blood, bile and urine, assayed by LCMS, were equally well described by both the TM-PBPK and SFM-PBPK. The fitted parameters for the models were similar, and the net formation intrinsic clearance of morphine (from codeine) for the liver was much higher, being 9- to 13-fold that of the intestine. Simulations, based on the absence of intestinal formation of morphine, correlated well with observations. The lack of discrimination of SFM and TM with the codeine data did not invalidate the SFM-PBPK model but rather suggests that the liver is the only major organ for codeine metabolism. Because of little or no contribution by the intestine to the metabolism of codeine, both the TM- and SFM-PBPK models are equally consistent with the data. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiopharmaceutics & Drug DispositionSame topicDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsFrench-language works237,207