Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23196805›Full record

ArticleThe AAPS journal2013

Mechanistic models describing active renal reabsorption and secretion: a simulation-based study.

Melanie A Felmlee, Rutwij A Dave, Marilyn E Morris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The AAPS journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Improving kidney targeting: The influence of nanoparticle physicochemical properties on kidney interactions.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2021
    Review
  9. Novel minimal physiologically-based model for the prediction of passive tubular reabsorption and renal excretion clearance.European journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2016
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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.

Melanie A FelmleeDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14214, USA.
Rutwij A Dave
Marilyn E Morris

Funding

Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate: Toxicokinetics, Toxicodynamics and Treatment StrategiesR01DA023223 · NIDA · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI MORRIS, MARILYN E · 2008 to 2016
$3.0M
NIDA NIH HHS DA 023223NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA023223
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to evaluate mechanistic pharmacokinetic models describing active renal secretion and reabsorption over a range of Michaelis-Menten parameter estimates and doses. Plasma concentration and urinary excretion profiles were simulated and renal clearance (CL(r)) was calculated for two pharmacokinetic models describing active renal reabsorption (R1/R2), two models describing active secretion (S1/S2), and a model containing both processes. A range of doses (1-1,000 mg/kg) was evaluated, and V (max) and K (m) parameter estimates were varied over a 100-fold range. Similar CL(r) values were predicted for reabsorption models (R1/R2) with variations in V (max) and K (m). Tubular secretion models (S1/S2) yielded similar relationships between Michaelis-Menten parameter perturbations and CL(r), but the predicted CL(r) values were threefold higher for model S1. For both reabsorption and secretion models, the greatest changes in CL(r) were observed with perturbations in V (max), suggesting the need for an accurate estimate of this parameter. When intrinsic clearance was substituted for Michaelis-Menten parameters, it failed to predict similar CL(r) values even within the linear range. For models S1 and S2, renal secretion was predominant at low doses, whereas renal clearance was driven by fraction unbound in plasma at high doses. Simulations demonstrated the importance of Michaelis-Menten parameter estimates (especially V (max)) for determining CL(r). K (m) estimates can easily be obtained directly from in vitro studies. However, additional scaling of in vitro V (max) estimates using in vitro/in vivo extrapolation methods are required to incorporate these parameters into pharmacokinetic models.

Indexed as

PharmacokineticsAbsorptionAnimalsComputer SimulationKidneyModels, BiologicalProtein BindingRats

Identifiers

PMID23196805
PMCPMC3535105

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.