Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29732710›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2018

Study Design Selection in Early Clinical Anti-Hyperglycemic Drug Development: A Simulation Study of Glucose Tolerance Tests.

Moustafa M A Ibrahim, Siti M S Ghadzi, Maria C Kjellsson, Mats O Karlsson

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Moustafa M A IbrahimDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Siti M S GhadziDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Maria C KjellssonDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Mats O KarlssonDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In antidiabetic drug development, phase I studies usually involve short-term glucose provocations. Multiple designs are available for these provocations (e.g., meal tolerance tests (MTTs) and graded glucose infusions (GGIs)). With a highly nonlinear, complex system as the glucose homeostasis, the various provocations will contribute with different information offering a rich choice. Here, we investigate the most appropriate study design in phase I for several hypothetical mechanisms of action of a study drug. Five drug effects in diabetes therapeutic areas were investigated using six study designs. Power to detect drug effect was assessed using the likelihood ratio test, whereas precision and accuracy of the quantification of drug effect was assessed using stochastic simulation and estimations. An overall summary was developed to aid designing the studies of antihyperglycemic drug development using model-based analysis. This guidance is to be used when the integrated glucose insulin model is used, involving the investigated drug mechanisms of action.

Indexed as

Glucose Tolerance TestBlood GlucoseClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicDrug DevelopmentHumansHypoglycemic AgentsLikelihood FunctionsModels, BiologicalResearch DesignStochastic ProcessesBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic Agents

Identifiers

PMID29732710
PMCPMC6063744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.