ReviewJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2013
In vitro, in vivo and in silico models of drug distribution into the brain.
Review in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- New In Vitro Methodology for Kinetics Distribution Prediction in the Brain. An Additional Step towards an Animal-Free Approach.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- In vitro toxicity model: Upgrades to bridge the gap between preclinical and clinical research.Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences · 2020Review
- Engineering the human blood-brain barrier in vitro.Journal of biological engineering · 2017Review
- Treating disorders of the neonatal central nervous system: pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations with a focus on antiepileptics.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2016Review
- Assays for the identification and prioritization of drug candidates for spinal muscular atrophy.Assay and drug development technologies · 2014Review
- Development of a physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model of the rat central nervous system.Pharmaceutics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Achieving sufficient brain penetration to elicit efficacy in humans is one of the most challenging tasks for scientists in CNS Drug Discovery. Substantial progress has been made in the past decade in understanding the factors influencing the rate and extent of brain distribution via a variety of in vivo, in vitro and in silico methodologies, and hence, predict their likelihood of success in man. This purpose of this review is to summarize the current approaches with a special focus on parameters related to free drug concentrations in brain which are the most pharmacologically relevant for the majority of CNS disease targets. Due to the dynamic and complex nature of this targeted organ, it is inevitable that these approaches have not been able to provide a fully comprehensive assessment of brain distribution and are expected to evolve further in the years to come.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23404394What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.