ArticlePloS one2022
Utilizing virtual experiments to increase understanding of discrepancies involving in vitro-to-in vivo predictions of hepatic clearance.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predictions of xenobiotic hepatic clearance in humans using in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation methods are frequently inaccurate and problematic. Multiple strategies are being pursued to disentangle responsible mechanisms. The objective of this work is to evaluate the feasibility of using insights gained from independent virtual experiments on two model systems to begin unraveling responsible mechanisms. The virtual culture is a software analog of hepatocytes in vitro, and the virtual human maps to hepatocytes within a liver within an idealized model human. Mobile objects (virtual compounds) map to amounts of xenobiotics. Earlier versions of the two systems achieved quantitative validation targets for intrinsic clearance (virtual culture) and hepatic clearance (virtual human). The major difference between the two systems is the spatial organization of the virtual hepatocytes. For each pair of experiments (virtual culture, virtual human), hepatocytes are configured the same. Probabilistic rules govern virtual compound movements and interactions with other objects. We focus on highly permeable virtual compounds and fix their extracellular unbound fraction at one of seven values (0.05-1.0). Hepatocytes contain objects that can bind and remove compounds, analogous to metabolism. We require that, for a subset of compound properties, per-hepatocyte compound exposure and removal rates during culture experiments directly predict corresponding measures made during virtual human experiments. That requirement serves as a cross-system validation target; we identify compound properties that enable achieving it. We then change compound properties, ceteris paribus, and provide model mechanism-based explanations for when and why measures made during culture experiments under- (or over-) predict corresponding measures made during virtual human experiments. The results show that, from the perspective of compound removal, the organization of hepatocytes within virtual livers is more efficient than within cultures, and the greater the efficiency difference, the larger the underprediction. That relationship is noteworthy because most in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation methods abstract away the structural organization of hepatocytes within a liver. More work is needed on multiple fronts, including the study of an expanded variety of virtual compound properties. Nevertheless, the results support the feasibility of the approach and plan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.