Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21306419›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2011

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships of central nervous system effects of scopolamine in healthy subjects.

Marieke Liem-Moolenaar, Peter de Boer, Maarten Timmers, Rik C Schoemaker, J G Coen van Hasselt, Stephan Schmidt, Joop M A van Gerven

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Anticholinesterase and Antioxidant Potential of Hydromethanolic Extract ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marieke Liem-MoolenaarCentre for Human Drug Research, Zernikedreef 10, 2333 CL Leiden, the Netherlands. mariekemoolenaar@online.nl
Peter de Boer
Maarten Timmers
Rik C Schoemaker
J G Coen van Hasselt
Stephan Schmidt
Joop M A van Gerven
Centre for Human Drug Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

what is already known about this subject• The cholinergic system is important for different central nervous system functions, including memory, learning and attention. Scopolamine, a centrally active muscarinic antagonist, has been used to model dementia and to demonstrate the pharmacological effects of cholinergic drugs, but for most effects the concentration-effect relationships are unknown. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: • We determined the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships of scopolamine using a multidimensional central nervous system test battery in a large group of healthy volunteers. The results suggested there are various functional cholinergic systems with different pharmacological characteristics, which can be used to study the effects of drugs that directly or indirectly modify cholinergic systems. The design of such studies should take the different concentration-effect relationships into account. AIM(S) Although scopolamine is a frequently used memory impairment model, the relationships between exposure and corresponding central nervous system (CNS) effects are mostly unknown. The aim of our study was to characterize these using pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) modelling.

methodsIn two double-blind, placebo-controlled, four-way crossover studies, 0.5-mg scopolamine was administered i.v. to 90 healthy male subjects. PK and PD/safety measures were monitored pre-dose and up to 8.5 h after administration. PK-PD relationships were modelled using non-linear mixed-effect modelling.

resultsMost PD responses following scopolamine administration in 85 subjects differed significantly from placebo. As PD measures lagged behind the plasma PK profile, PK-PD relationships were modelled using an effect compartment and arbitrarily categorized according to their equilibration half-lives (t(1/2) k(eo) ; hysteresis measure). t(1/2) k(eo) for heart rate was 17 min, saccadic eye movements and adaptive tracking 1-1.5 h, body sway, smooth pursuit, visual analogue scales alertness and psychedelic 2.5-3.5 h, pupil size, finger tapping and visual analogue scales feeling high more than 8 h.

conclusionsScopolamine affected different CNS functions in a concentration-dependent manner, which based on their distinct PK-PD characteristics seemed to reflect multiple distinct functional pathways of the cholinergic system. All PD effects showed considerable albeit variable delays compared with plasma concentrations. The t(1/2) k(eo) of the central effects was longer than of the peripheral effects on heart rate, which at least partly reflects the long CNS retention of scopolamine, but possibly also the triggering of independent secondary mechanisms. PK-PD analysis can optimize scopolamine administration regimens for future research and give insight into the physiology and pharmacology of human cholinergic systems.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCentral Nervous SystemCross-Over StudiesDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodElectroencephalographyHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, BiologicalMuscarinic AntagonistsSaccadesScopolamineYoung AdultMuscarinic AntagonistsScopolamine

Identifiers

PMID21306419
PMCPMC3099375
OpenAlexW1577969467

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.