ReviewFrontiers in physiology2017
Humans Vary, So Cardiac Models Should Account for That Too!
Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Uncertainty assessment of proarrhythmia predictions derived from multi-level in silico models.Archives of toxicology · 2023Article
- Thoroughly Calibrated Modular Agent-Based Model of the Human Cardiovascular and Renal Systems for Blood Pressure Regulation in Health and Disease.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The utilization of mathematical modeling and simulation in drug development encompasses multiple mathematical techniques and the location of a drug candidate in the development pipeline. Historically speaking they have been used to analyze experimental data (i.e., Hill equation) and clarify the involved physical and chemical processes (i.e., Fick laws and drug molecule diffusion). In recent years the advanced utilization of mathematical modeling has been an important part of the regulatory review process. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models identify the need to conduct specific clinical studies, suggest specific study designs and propose appropriate labeling language. Their application allows the evaluation of the influence of intrinsic (e.g., age, gender, genetics, disease) and extrinsic [e.g., dosing schedule, drug-drug interactions (DDIs)] factors, alone or in combinations, on drug exposure and therefore provides accurate population assessment. A similar pathway has been taken for the assessment of drug safety with cardiac safety being one the most advanced examples. Mechanistic mathematical model-informed safety evaluation, with a focus on drug potential for causing arrhythmias, is now discussed as an element of the Comprehensive
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.