Physiologically‐Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling Characterizes the CYP3A‐Mediated Drug‐Drug Interaction Between Fluconazole and Sildenafil in Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling can potentially predict pediatric drug‐drug interactions (DDIs) when clinical DDI data are limited. In infants for whom treatment of pulmonary hypertension and prevention or treatment of invasive candidiasis are indicated, sildenafil with fluconazole may be given concurrently. To account for developmental changes in cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A, we determined and incorporated fluconazole inhibition constants (KI) for CYP3A4, CYP3A5, and CYP3A7 into a PBPK model developed for sildenafil and its active metabolite, N‐desmethylsildenafil. Pharmacokinetic (PK) data in preterm infants receiving sildenafil with and without fluconazole were used for model development and evaluation. The simulated PK parameters were comparable to observed values. Following fluconazole co‐administration, differences in the fold change for simulated steady‐state area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve from 0 to 24 hours (AUCss,0–24) were observed between virtual adults and infants (2.11‐fold vs. 2.82‐fold change). When given in combination with treatment doses of fluconazole (12 mg/kg i.v. daily), reducing the sildenafil dose by ~ 60% resulted in a geometric mean ratio of 1.01 for simulated AUCss,0–24relative to virtual infants receiving sildenafil alone. This study highlights the feasibility of PBPK modeling to predict DDIs in infants and the need to include CYP3A7 parameters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".