Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22747489›Full record

ArticleVeterinary and comparative oncology2014

Development of a limited-sampling model for prediction of doxorubicin exposure in dogs.

L A Wittenburg, D H Thamm, D L Gustafson

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary and comparative oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Species differences in tumour responses to cancer chemotherapy.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2015
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

L A WittenburgDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University Animal Cancer Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
D H Thamm
D L Gustafson
University of Colorado Denver · USColorado State University · US

Funding

University of Colorado Cancer Center Support Grant - Lung Cancer Patient-Derived Xenografts with Autologous Human Immune SystemsP30CA046934 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI James V Degregori · 1988 to 2026
$117.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046934
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the relationship between drug dose and exposure (pharmacokinetics, PK) and the relationship between exposure and effect (pharmacodynamics) is an important component of pharmacology when attempting to predict clinical effects of anticancer drugs. PK studies can provide a better understanding of these relationships; however, they often involve intensive sampling over an extended period of time, resulting in increased cost and decreased compliance. Doxorubicin (DOX), one of the most widely used antineoplastic agents in veterinary cancer therapy, is characterized by large interpatient variability in overall drug exposure and the development and degree of myelosuppression following equivalent dosages. We have developed and validated a limited-sampling strategy for DOX, in which three blood samples are obtained over 1 h post-treatment, that accurately predicts patient exposure. This strategy could allow for refining of dosing variables and utilization of therapeutic drug monitoring to ensure optimized dosing.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibiotics, AntineoplasticArea Under CurveBlood Specimen CollectionBone MarrowDog DiseasesDogsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDoxorubicinAntibiotics, AntineoplasticDoxorubicinadriamycincaninelimited samplingpharmacodynamicspharmacokinetics

Identifiers

PMID22747489
PMCPMC3897556
OpenAlexW1788320651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.