Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27273555›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2016

Model-based exposure-response analysis to quantify age related differences in the response to scopolamine in healthy subjects.

Ricardo Alvarez-Jimenez, Geert Jan Groeneveld, Joop M A van Gerven, Sebastiaan C Goulooze, Anne Catrien Baakman, Justin L Hay, Jasper Stevens

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Article
  6. Nutrients · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Anticholinesterase and Antioxidant Potential of Hydromethanolic Extract ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Neuroprotection ofNeural regeneration research · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ricardo Alvarez-JimenezCentre for Human Drug Research, 2333, CL, Leiden, the Netherlands. ralvarez@chdr.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-7581-7566
Geert Jan GroeneveldCentre for Human Drug Research, 2333, CL, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Joop M A van GervenCentre for Human Drug Research, 2333, CL, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Sebastiaan C GouloozeCentre for Human Drug Research, 2333, CL, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3369-6107
Anne Catrien BaakmanCentre for Human Drug Research, 2333, CL, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Justin L HayCentre for Human Drug Research, 2333, CL, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Jasper StevensCentre for Human Drug Research, 2333, CL, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Centre for Human Drug Research · NLLeiden University · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimSubjects with increasing age are more sensitive to the effects of the anti-muscarinic agent scopolamine, which is used (among other indications) to induce temporary cognitive dysfunction in early phase drug studies with cognition enhancing compounds. The enhanced sensitivity has always been attributed to incipient cholinergic neuronal dysfunction, as a part of the normal aging process. The aim of the study was to correlate age-dependent pharmacodynamic neuro-physiologic effects of scopolamine after correcting for differences in individual exposure.

methodsWe applied a pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling approach to describe individual exposure and neurocognitive effects of intravenous scopolamine administration in healthy subjects.

resultsA two-compartment linear kinetics model best described the plasma concentrations of scopolamine. The estimated scopolamine population mean apparent central and peripheral volume of distribution was 2.66 ± 1.050 l and 62.10 ± 10.100 l, respectively and the clearance was 1.09 ± 0.096 l min(-1) . Age was not related to a decrease of performance in the tests following scopolamine administration in older subjects. Only the saccadic peak velocity showed a positive correlation between age and sensitivity to scopolamine. Age was, however, correlated at baseline with an estimated slower reaction time while performing the cognitive tests and to higher global δ and frontal θ frequency bands measured with the surface EEG.

conclusionsMost of the differences in response to scopolamine administration between young and older subjects could be explained by pharmacokinetic differences (lower clearance) and not to an enhanced sensitivity when corrected for exposure levels.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAgingCognitionDose-Response Relationship, DrugElectroencephalographyFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansInfusions, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedModels, BiologicalMuscarinic AntagonistsNeuropsychological TestsMuscarinic AntagonistsScopolamineageingcholinergic dysfunctionhealthy subjectsNONMEMpharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modellingscopolamine

Identifiers

PMID27273555
PMCPMC5137826
OpenAlexW2411766674

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.