Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12162757›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2002

Considerations in the use of cerebrospinal fluid pharmacokinetics to predict brain target concentrations in the clinical setting: implications of the barriers between blood and brain.

Elizabeth C M de Lange, Meindert Danhof

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

71 citing papers in PubMed, 241 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Pharmacokinetics as a Biomarker.Clinical and translational science · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Distribution of ganciclovir in the porcine central nervous system.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth C M de LangeDivision of Pharmacology, Leiden/Amsterdam Center for Drug Research, Sylvius Laboratories, Leiden, The Netherlands. l.lange@lacdr.leidenuniv.nl
Meindert Danhof
Centre for Human Drug Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the clinical setting, drug concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) are sometimes used as a surrogate for drug concentrations at the target site within the brain. However, the brain consists of multiple compartments and many factors are involved in the transport of drugs from plasma into the brain and the distribution within the brain. In particular, active transport processes at the level of the blood-brain barrier and blood-CSF barrier, such as those mediated by P-glycoprotein, may lead to complex relationships between concentrations in plasma, ventricular and lumbar CSF, and other brain compartments. Therefore, CSF concentrations may be difficult to interpret and may have limited value. Pharmacokinetic data obtained by intracerebral microdialysis monitoring may be used instead, providing more valuable information. As non-invasive alternative techniques, positron emission tomography or magnetic resonance spectroscopy may be of added value.

Indexed as

PharmacokineticsAnimalsBiological Transport, ActiveBlood-Brain BarrierBrainCerebrovascular CirculationDrug Delivery SystemsHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsTissue DistributionPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID12162757
OpenAlexW2066941852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.