Lymphatic Drug Absorption via the Enterocytes: Pharmacokinetic Simulation, Modeling, and Considerations for Optimal Drug Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most orally administered drugs gain access to the systemic circulation by direct passage from the enterocyte layer of the intestinal tract to the mesenteric blood capillaries. Intestinal lymphatic absorption is another pathway that certain drugs may follow to gain access to the systemic circulation after oral administration. Once absorbed, drug diffuses into the intestinal enterocyte and while in transit may associate with fats as they are processed into chylomicrons within the cells. The chylomicron-associated drug is then secreted from the enterocyte into the lymphatic circulation, thus avoiding the hepatic first-pass liver metabolism, and ultimately entering to the systemic circulation for disposition and action. Due to the possibility of parallel and potentially alternative absorptive pathways, mesenteric blood capillary and lymphatic drug exposure are both potential pathways of systemic availability for any individual drug. In this report, an in silico modeling approach was adopted to delineate the salient pharmacokinetic features of lymphatic absorption, and provide further guidance for the rationale design of drugs and drug delivery systems for lymphatic drug transport. The importance of hepatic extraction ratio, absorption lag time, lipoprotein binding, and the influence of competing portal and lymphatic pathways for systemic drug availability were explored using simulations. The degree of hepatic extraction was found to be an essential consideration when examining the influence of lymphatic uptake to overall oral drug bioavailability. Lymphatic absorption could potentially contribute to multiple peaking phenomena and flip flop pharmacokinetics of orally administered drugs.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".