MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing Quantitative Analysis of Xenobiotics in Blood Plasma through Cross-Matrix Calibration and Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling

2023· article· en· W4389334408 on OpenAlex
Nipunika H. Godage, Song S. Qian, Erasmus Cudjoe, Emanuela Gionfriddo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Measurement Science Au · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Canadian institutionsPerkinElmer Biosignal
FundersUniversity of Toledo
KeywordsAnalyteMatrix (chemical analysis)CalibrationCalibration curveChromatographyPlasmaHuman plasmaChemistryExtraction (chemistry)Biological systemMaterials scienceDetection limitStatisticsMathematicsPhysicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study addresses the challenges of matrix effects and interspecies plasma protein binding (PPB) on measurement variability during method validation across diverse plasma types (human, rat, rabbit, and bovine). Accurate measurements of small molecules in plasma samples often require matrix-matched calibration approaches with the use of specific plasma types, which may have limited availability or affordability. To mitigate the costs associated with human plasma measurements, we explore in this work the potential of cross-matrix-matched calibration using Bayesian hierarchical modeling (BHM) to correct for matrix effects associated with PPB. We initially developed a targeted quantitative approach utilizing biocompatible solid-phase microextraction coupled with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry for xenobiotic analysis in plasma. The method was evaluated for absolute matrix effects across human, bovine, rat, and rabbit plasma comparing pre- and postmatrix extraction standards. Absolute matrix effects from 96 to 108% for most analytes across plasma sources indicate that the biocompatibility of the extraction phase minimizes interference coextraction. However, the extent of PPB in different media can still affect the accuracy of the measurement when the extraction of small molecules is carried out via free concentration, as in the case of microextraction techniques. In fact, while matrix-matched calibration revealed high accuracy, cross-matrix calibration (e.g., using a calibration curve generated from bovine plasma) proved inadequate for precise measurements in human plasma. A BHM was used to calculate correction factors for each analyte within each plasma type, successfully mitigating the measurement bias resulting from diverse calibration curve types used to quantify human plasma samples. This work contributes to the development of cost-effective, efficient calibration strategies for biofluids. Leveraging easily accessible plasma sources, like bovine plasma, for method optimization and validation prior to analyzing costly plasma (e.g., human plasma) holds substantial advantages applicable to biomonitoring and pharmacokinetic studies.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.251 · 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