MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093780774 · doi:10.1080/15287394.2020.1835761

Evaluation of models for predicting pediatric fraction unbound in plasma for human health risk assessment

2020· article· en· W3093780774 on OpenAlexafffund
Yejin Esther Yun, Andrea N. Edginton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical studies and practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOntogenyPhysiologically based pharmacokinetic modellingAlbuminQuantitative structure–activity relationshipPlasma concentrationChemistryPharmacokineticsBiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiochemistryMedicineStereochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pediatric physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models facilitate the prediction of PK parameters in children under specific exposure conditions. Pharmacokinetic outcomes are highly sensitive to fraction unbound in plasma (fup) as incorporated into PBPK models. Rarely is fup in children (fupchild) experimentally derived and prediction is based upon fup in adults (fupadult) as well as a ratio of plasma protein concentrations between children and adults. The objectives were to (i) evaluate protein concentration vs. age profile derived from ontogeny models, (ii) assess predictive performances of fup ontogeny models, and (iii) determine overall uncertainty in fupchild prediction resulting from a combination of quantitative structure–property relationship (QSPR) model and ontogeny models. The plasma albumin and alpha-acid glycoprotein (AAG) concentration data for pediatrics and fupchild and fupadult data were obtained from literature. The protein concentration vs. age profile derived from ontogeny models were compared to observed levels. Fupchild values were calculated according to ontogeny models using both observed and QSPR-predicted fupadult as inputs and predictive performances of ontogeny models assessed by comparing predicted fupchild to observed values. Protein concentrations vs. age profiles derived from non-linear equations were more congruent with observed albumin levels than linear or step-wise models. When observed fupadult values were used as input, the fupchild data were under-predicted with average fold error (AFE) amounts ranging 0.79–0.81 and 0.77–0.97 for albumin and AAG ontogeny models, respectively. When QSPR-predicted fupadult values were used as input, AFE of fupchild ranged 1.2–1.35 and 0.98–1.2 for albumin and AAG models, respectively. The choice of ontogeny model with respect to prediction accuracy is more important for AAG, highly bound compounds and infants. For these compounds and scenarios, experimental determination of fupchild for inclusion into a pediatric PBPK model is necessary to have confidence in PBPK model outputs.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental HealthSame topicPharmaceutical studies and practicesFrench-language works237,207