Unequivocal evidence supporting the segregated flow intestinal model that discriminates intestine versus liver first‐pass removal with PBPK modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Merits of the segregated flow model (SFM), highlighting the intestine as inert serosa and active enterocyte regions, with a smaller fractional (f Q < 0.3) intestinal flow (Q I ) perfusing the enterocyte region, are described. Less drug in the circulation reaches the enterocytes due to the lower flow (f Q Q I ) in comparison with drug administered into the gut lumen, fostering the idea of route‐dependent intestinal removal. The SFM has been found superior to the traditional model (TM), which views the serosa and enterocytes totally as a well‐mixed tissue perfused by 100% of the intestinal flow, Q I . The SFM model is able to explain the lower extents of intestinal metabolism of enalapril, morphine and midazolam with i.v. vs. p.o. dosing. For morphine, the urine/bile ratio of the metabolite, morphine glucuronide for p.o. was 2.6× that of i.v. This was due to the higher proportion of intestinally formed morphine glucuronide, appearing more in urine than in bile due to its low permeability and greater extent of intestinal formation with p.o. administration. By contrast, the TM predicted the same for p.o. vs. i.v. The TM predicted that the contributions of the intestine:liver to first‐pass removal were 46%:54% for both p.o. and i.v. The SFM predicted same 46%:54% (intestine:liver) for p.o., but 9%:91% for i.v. By contrast, the kinetics of codeine, the precursor of morphine, was described equally well by the SFM‐ and TM‐PBPK models, a trend suggesting that intestinal metabolism of codeine is negligible. Fits to these PBPK models further provide insightful information towards metabolite formation: available fractions and the fractions of hepatic and total clearances that form the metabolite in question. The SFM‐PBPK model is useful to identify not only the presence of intestinal metabolism but the contributions of the intestine and liver for metabolite formation. 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".