Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26225237›Full record

ReviewCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2015

Modeling and Simulation Approaches for Cardiovascular Function and Their Role in Safety Assessment.

T A Collins, L Bergenholm, T Abdulla, Jwt Yates, N Evans, M J Chappell, J T Mettetal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Translating QT interval prolongation from conscious dogs to humans.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
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

7 authors.

T A CollinsDrug Safety and Metabolism, AstraZeneca Alderley Park, Macclesfield, UK.
L BergenholmSchool of Engineering, University of Warwick UK.
T AbdullaSchool of Engineering, University of Warwick UK.
Jwt YatesOncology, AstraZeneca Alderley Park, Macclesfield, UK.
N EvansSchool of Engineering, University of Warwick UK.
M J ChappellSchool of Engineering, University of Warwick UK.
J T MettetalDrug Safety and Metabolism, AstraZeneca Waltham, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/K001205/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systems pharmacology modeling and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) analysis of drug-induced effects on cardiovascular (CV) function plays a crucial role in understanding the safety risk of new drugs. The aim of this review is to outline the current modeling and simulation (M&S) approaches to describe and translate drug-induced CV effects, with an emphasis on how this impacts drug safety assessment. Current limitations are highlighted and recommendations are made for future effort in this vital area of drug research.

Identifiers

PMID26225237
PMCPMC4394617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.