ArticleClinical drug investigation2014
Pharmacokinetic profile of dextromethorphan hydrobromide in a syrup formulation in children and adolescents.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Toxicology of OTC Cough and Cold Pediatric Medications: A Narrative Review.Pediatric health, medicine and therapeutics · 2024Review
- Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling of dextromethorphan to investigate interindividual variability within CYP2D6 activity score groups.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDextromethorphan hydrobromide (DM) is a widely used antitussive. This study determined, for the first time, the basic pharmacokinetic profile of DM and its active metabolite, dextrorphan (DP) in children and adolescents.
methodsThirty-eight male and female subjects at risk for developing an upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), or symptomatic with cough due to URTI, were enrolled in this single-dose, open-label study: ages 2-5 years (Group A, n = 8), 6-11 years (Group B, n = 17), 12-17 years (Group C, n = 13). Subjects were genotyped for cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 polymorphisms and characterized as poor (PM) or non-poor metabolizers (non-PM). Groups A and B were dosed using an age-weight dosing schedule (DM range 7.5-24.75 mg); a 30-mg dose was used for Group C.
resultsAverage exposures to total DP increased as age group increased, and average exposure to DM was highest in the adolescent group. One subject in that group was a PM. The terminal half-life (t ½) values were longer in the adolescent group due in part to the single PM subject. No relationship between body weight and pharmacokinetic parameters was noted.
conclusionsThis is the first evaluation of the pharmacokinetic characteristics of DM in children and adolescents. A single dose of DM in this population was safe, and well tolerated at all doses tested. The data are used to model and compare pediatric DM exposures with those of adults.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.