MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885748302 · doi:10.1002/cpt.1183

Advancing Predictions of Tissue and Intracellular Drug Concentrations Using <i>In Vitro</i>, Imaging and Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling Approaches

2018· article· en· W2885748302 on OpenAlexaff
Yingying Guo, Xiaoyan Chu, Neil Parrott, Kim L. R. Brouwer, Vicky Hsu, Swati Nagar, Pär Matsson, Pradeep Sharma, Jan Snoeys, Yuichi Sugiyama, Daniel Tatosian, Jashvant D. Unadkat, Shiew‐Mei Huang, Aleksandra Galetin

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPhysiologically based pharmacokinetic modellingPharmacokineticsDrugPharmacologyDrug developmentIn vivoDispositionIn vitroMedicineComputational biologyComputer scienceChemistryBiologyBiotechnologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This white paper examines recent progress, applications, and challenges in predicting unbound and total tissue and intra/subcellular drug concentrations using in vitro and preclinical models, imaging techniques, and physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling. Published examples, regulatory submissions, and case studies illustrate the application of different types of data in drug development to support modeling and decision making for compounds with transporter-mediated disposition, and likely disconnects between tissue and systemic drug exposure. The goals of this article are to illustrate current best practices and outline practical strategies for selecting appropriate in vitro and in vivo experimental methods to estimate or predict tissue and plasma concentrations, and to use these data in the application of PBPK modeling for human pharmacokinetic (PK), efficacy, and safety assessment in drug development.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations116
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsFrench-language works237,207