ArticlePharmaceutical research2016
Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Etoposide Free Concentrations in Solid Tumor.
Article in Pharmaceutical research, 2016. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enantiomeric Excess Bupivacaine in a Lavender Oil NLC Tested in a Melanoma Model: Prolonged Release and Anticancer Effect.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Perspectives on the Use of a Medium-Dose Etoposide, Cyclophosphamide, and Total Body Irradiation Conditioning Regimen in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: The Japanese Experience from 1993 to Present.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- A Population Dynamic Energy Budget-Based Tumor Growth Inhibition Model for Etoposide Effects on Wistar Rats.Pharmaceutical research · 2019Article
- Microdialysis as an Important Technique in Systems Pharmacology-a Historical and Methodological Review.The AAPS journal · 2017Review
- The Walker 256 Breast Cancer Cell- Induced Bone Pain Model in Rats.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine free etoposide (ETO) concentrations in two regions of Walker-256 (W256) solid tumor using microdialysis and to establish a population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model to describe simultaneously free tumor and total plasma concentrations.
methodsW256 tumor-bearing Wistar rats received ETO 10 or 20 mg/kg i.v. bolus. Free ETO concentrations were sampled from central and peripheral regions of the tumor via CMA/20 probes for up to 7 h, whereas blood samples were collected via carotid artery cannulation. Total plasma and free tumor concentration-time profiles were analyzed by non-compartmental approach using WinNonlin® v. 5.3. PopPK modeling was conducted using MONOLIX v.4.3.3.
resultsETO penetration was higher in the periphery (61 ± 15% and 61 ± 29%) than in tumor center (34 ± 6% and 28 ± 11%) following 10 and 20 mg/kg doses, respectively (ANOVA, α = 0.05). A 4-compartment model fitted ETO concentration-time profiles in all sampling compartments.
conclusionsThe popPK model allowed the simultaneous fitting of plasma and tumor concentrations and a better understanding of ETO distribution in solid tumors. ETO plasma concentrations are not a good surrogate for tumoral exposure, emphasizing the importance of knowing intratumoral concentrations to predict drug response.
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.