MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969547789 · doi:10.18433/jpps30505

Limited Sampling Strategy for the Estimation of Mycophenolic Acid and its Acyl Glucuronide Metabolite Area under the Concentration-Time Curve in Japanese Lung Transplant Recipients

2019· article· en· W2969547789 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masaki Tanaka, Masafumi Kikuchi, Shinya Takasaki, Tensei Hirasawa, Kensuke Sigeta, Aoi Noda, Miki Akiba, Yasushi Matsuda, Hisashi Oishi, Tetsu Sado, Masafumi Noda, Yoshinori Okada, Nariyasu Mano, Hiroaki Yamaguchi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Research Foundation for Clinical Pharmacology
KeywordsMycophenolic acidMycophenolatePharmacokineticsTacrolimusMedicineTherapeutic drug monitoringArea under the curveBlood samplingDosingGlucuronideTransplantationPharmacologyActive metaboliteUrologyLung transplantationMetaboliteInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The dose of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) used to prevent rejection after lung transplantation is often adjusted based on the 12-hour area under the concentration-time curve (AUC0-12) of mycophenolic acid (MPA). A limited sampling strategy (LSS) is useful to define the pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of MPA and mycophenolic acid acyl glucuronide (AcMPAG). Therefore, this study aimed to design a LSS based on multiple linear regression for estimating the AUC0-12 of MPA and AcMPAG at the minimum blood sampling points in Japanese lung transplant patients with concomitant tacrolimus. METHODS: Forty-five lung transplantation recipients were enrolled in a PK study of MPA, mycophenolic acid glucuronide (MPAG), and AcMPAG. The plasma MPA, MPAG, and AcMPAG concentrations were determined just before and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours after dosing. The AUC0-12 of MPA and AcMPAG was calculated using a linear trapezoidal rule from the plasma concentration of each blood sampling time. LSS was used to develop models for estimated AUC in the model group (n = 23) and was evaluated in the validation group (n = 22). RESULTS: The best three time-point equation was 4.04 + 1.64·C1 + 3.08·C4 + 5.17·C8 for MPA, and -0.13 + 3.01·C1 + 3.51·C4 + 5.74·C8 for AcMPAG. The prediction errors (PE) and the absolute prediction errors (APE) were within the clinically acceptable ± 5% and 15% range, respectively (MPA: PE = 2.00%, APE = 11.66%, AcMPAG: PE = 0.98%, APE = 14.69%). The percentage of estimated AUC0-12 within ± 15% of the observed AUC0-12 was 77.27% for MPA and 81.82% for AcMPAG. CONCLUSION: LSS using three time-point (C1, C4, and C8) provides the most reliable and accurate simultaneous estimation of the AUC0-12 of MPA and AcMPAG in Japanese lung transplant patients.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical SciencesSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207