ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2018
Evaluation and Optimization of Pharmacokinetic Models for
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of in vitro to in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) to inform chemical health guidance value derivation-sample case studies comparing neuro-, hepato-, and developmental toxicities.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026Article
- Application ofFrontiers in toxicology · 2026Review
- Interpretation of in vitro concentration-response data for risk assessment and regulatory decision-making: Report from the 2022 IWGT quantitative analysis expert working group meeting.Environmental and molecular mutagenesis · 2025Review
- Multimodal feature fusion machine learning for predicting chronic injury induced by engineered nanomaterials.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Informing Hazard Identification and Risk Characterization of Environmental Chemicals by Combining Transcriptomic and Functional Data from Human-Induced Pluripotent Stem-Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes.Chemical research in toxicology · 2024Article
- Advancing Toxicity Predictions: A Review onEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2024Review
- Challenging the status quo: a framework for mechanistic and human-relevant cardiovascular safety screening.Frontiers in toxicology · 2024Review
- Key challenges for in vitro testing of tobacco products for regulatory applications: Recommendations for dosimetry.Drug testing and analysis · 2023Article
- Quantitative in vitro to in vivo extrapolation for developmental toxicity potency of valproic acid analogues.Birth defects research · 2022Article
- Impact of High-Throughput Model Parameterization and Data Uncertainty on Thyroid-Based Toxicological Estimates for Pesticide Chemicals.Environmental science & technology · 2022Article
- IVIVE: Facilitating the Use ofToxics · 2022Review
- A framework for chemical safety assessment incorporating new approach methodologies within REACH.Archives of toxicology · 2022Article
- Dynamic Mass Balance Modeling for Chemical Distribution Over Time inFrontiers in toxicology · 2022Article
- U.S. Federal Agency interests and key considerations for new approach methodologies for nanomaterials.ALTEX · 2022Article
- Considerations for Improving Metabolism Predictions forFrontiers in toxicology · 2022Review
- Update and Evaluation of a High-Throughput In Vitro Mass Balance Distribution Model: IV-MBM EQP v2.0.Toxics · 2021Article
- Cardiotoxicity Hazard and Risk Characterization of ToxCast Chemicals Using Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes from Multiple Donors.Chemical research in toxicology · 2021Article
- High-throughput PBTK models forExpert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology · 2021Review
- Predictive modeling of biological responses in the rat liver usingComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- An integrated chemical environment with tools for chemical safety testing.Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo effectively incorporate
objectiveOur goal was to evaluate and optimize
methodsWe evaluated three pharmacokinetic (PK) models with varying complexities to extrapolate
resultsWe found little difference in model predictive performance based on complexity or route-specific modifications. Simple adjustments, applied to account for
conclusionComputational IVIVE approaches accurately estimate chemical exposure levels that elicit positive responses in the rodent uterotrophic bioassay. The simplest model had the best overall performance for predicting both oral (PPK_EF) and injection (PPK_[Formula: see text]) LELs from guideline uterotrophic studies, is freely available, and can be parameterized entirely using freely available
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.