Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26872884›Full record

SynthesisJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2016

Model-based meta-analysis for development of a population-pharmacokinetic (PPK) model for Vitamin D3 and its 25OHD3 metabolite using both individual and arm-level data.

Alanna S Ocampo-Pelland, Marc R Gastonguay, Jonathan F French, Matthew M Riggs

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Vitamin DInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Vitamin DDrug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Personalise vitamin DCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2021
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors.

Alanna S Ocampo-PellandDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA. alannao@metrumrg.com.
Marc R GastonguayDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA.
Jonathan F FrenchMetrum Research Group LLC, Tariffville, CT, USA.
Matthew M RiggsMetrum Research Group LLC, Tariffville, CT, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical studies investigating relationships between D3 and 25OHD3 vary in dosing regimen, assays, demographics, and control of exogenous D3. This leads to uncertain and conflicting exposure-related associations with D3 and 25OHD3. To elucidate this parent-metabolite system, a PPK model was developed to predict mean D3 and 25OHD3 exposure from varied doses and administration routes. Sources of exposure variability related to metabolite baseline, weight, and assay type were explored. Specific search criteria were used in PUBMED to identify public source PK data pertaining to D3 and 25OHD3 in healthy or osteoporotic populations. Overall 57 studies representing 5395 individuals were selected, including 25 individual-level profiles and treatment-arm data. IV, oral, single and multiple dose data were used, with D3 and 25OHD3 dosing. A nonlinear mixed effects model was developed to simultaneously model PK dispositions of D3 and 25OHD3 (NONMEM v7.2), which were described by 2-compartment models with nonlinear and linear clearances, respectively. Proportional and additive assay variances were included on the 25OHD3 prediction. Unit-level random effects were weighted by treatment-arm size. D3 model estimates, relative to bioavailability were: maximum rate of metabolism ([Formula: see text], 1.62 nmol/h), Michaelis-Menten constant ([Formula: see text], 6.39 nmol/L), central volume of distribution ([Formula: see text], 15.5 L), intercompartmental clearance ([Formula: see text], 0.185 L/h), peripheral volume of distribution ([Formula: see text], 2333 L/h), and baseline concentration ([Formula: see text], 3.75 nmol/L). For 25OHD3 ([Formula: see text] = metabolite): [Formula: see text] = 0.0153 L/h, [Formula: see text] = 4.35 L, [Formula: see text] = 6.87 L, [Formula: see text] = 0.0507 L/h. Simulations of 25OHD3 concentration indicated an inverse relationship between 25OHD3 baseline and response, as well as a less than proportional 25OHD3 response. Estimation of assay bias parameters suggested that HPLC-MS and RIA produced similar measurement results, whereas CPBA and CHEMI are over-predictive of 25OHD3 concentration, relative to HPLC-MS.

Indexed as

Biological AvailabilityCalcifediolCholecalciferolDrug Administration RoutesHealthy VolunteersHumansModels, TheoreticalNonlinear DynamicsOsteoporosisCalcifediolCholecalciferol25-Hydroxyvitamin D325OHD3 assaysMeta-analysisNonlinear mixed effects modelPharmacokineticsVitamin D3

Identifiers

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.