Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19026033›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2008

Does oxcarbazepine warrant therapeutic drug monitoring? A critical review.

Penny Bring, Mary H H Ensom

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Pharmacogenetics and Oxcarbazepine in Children and Adolescents: BeyondJournal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Modern methods for analysis of antiepileptic drugs in the biological fluids for pharmacokinetics, bioequivalence and therapeutic drug monitoring.The Korean journal of physiology & pharmacology : official journal of the Korean Physiological Society and the Korean Society of Pharmacology · 2011
    Article
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.

Penny BringUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Mary H H Ensom
University of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oxcarbazepine, the 10-keto analogue of carbamazepine, is approved for the treatment of partial seizures or generalized tonic-clonic seizures. The primary metabolite of oxcarbazepine is monohydroxylated derivative (MHD). This review follows a decision-making algorithm to determine if therapeutic drug monitoring of MHD is warranted.Important factors to take into account include the appropriateness of oxcarbazepine for the therapeutic indication; ability to measure MHD concentrations; existence of a good concentration-response relationship, narrow therapeutic range or unpredictable pharmacokinetic parameters; assessability of the pharmacological response of oxcarbazepine; adequate duration of therapy; and potential influence of MHD concentrations in the clinical decision-making process. Based on the available evidence, therapeutic drug monitoring of MHD is not routinely warranted but may be beneficial in optimizing seizure control at the extremes of age, during pregnancy, in renal insufficiency, or to determine the significance of potential drug interactions or rule out noncompliance.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAnticonvulsantsCarbamazepineDrug MonitoringHumansHydroxylationOxcarbazepineSeizuresAnticonvulsantsCarbamazepineOxcarbazepine

Identifiers

PMID19026033
OpenAlexW186511383

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.