ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2014
Adjustment of endogenous concentrations in pharmacokinetic modeling.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodological Considerations in the Bioequivalence Assessment of Recombinant Human Serum Albumin [Letter].Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Selective human factor VIII activity measurement after analytical in-line purification.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of the von Willebrand factor-factor VIII interaction in patients with von Willebrand disease.Blood advances · 2021Article
- Population Pharmacokinetics of Clotting Factor Concentrates and Desmopressin in Hemophilia.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2021Review
- SHP656, a polysialylated recombinant factor VIII (PSA-rFVIII): First-in-human study evaluating safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics in patients with severe haemophilia A.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia · 2020Article
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
purposeEstimating pharmacokinetic parameters in the presence of an endogenous concentration is not straightforward as cross-reactivity in the analytical methodology prevents differentiation between endogenous and dose-related exogenous concentrations. This article proposes a novel intuitive modeling approach which adequately adjusts for the endogenous concentration.
methodsMonte Carlo simulations were carried out based on a two-compartment population pharmacokinetic (PK) model fitted to real data following intravenous administration. A constant and a proportional error model were assumed. The performance of the novel model and the method of straightforward subtraction of the observed baseline concentration from post-dose concentrations were compared in terms of terminal half-life, area under the curve from 0 to infinity, and mean residence time.
resultsMean bias in PK parameters was up to 4.5 times better with the novel model assuming a constant error model and up to 6.5 times better assuming a proportional error model.
conclusionsThe simulation study indicates that this novel modeling approach results in less biased and more accurate PK estimates than straightforward subtraction of the observed baseline concentration and overcomes the limitations of previously published approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25277161What 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.