Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30349948›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical research2018

The Extended Clearance Concept Following Oral and Intravenous Dosing: Theory and Critical Analyses.

Leslie Z Benet, Christine M Bowman, Shufang Liu, Jasleen K Sodhi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Response to the commentary on "are all measures of liver KpEuropean journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Are all measures of liver KpEuropean journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. EvaluatingFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Recent developments inDrug metabolism reviews · 2021
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Leslie Z BenetDepartment of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences, Schools of Pharmacy and Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, 94143-0912, USA. Leslie.Benet@ucsf.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9678-2371
Christine M BowmanDepartment of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences, Schools of Pharmacy and Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, 94143-0912, USA.
Shufang LiuDepartment of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences, Schools of Pharmacy and Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, 94143-0912, USA.
Jasleen K SodhiDepartment of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences, Schools of Pharmacy and Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, 94143-0912, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

UCSF Liver Core CenterP30DK026743 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Holger Willenbring · 1986 to 2026
$30.7M
Maximizing Opportunities for Research Excellence - Evaluation Training SupplementR25GM056847 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI DUNCAN, D'ANNE S., SELLO, JASON K · 1998 to 2023
$14.1M
PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES AND PHARMACOGENOMICST32GM007175 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI AHITUV, NADAV, KROETZ, DEANNA L · 1985 to 2021
$7.1M
National Institute of General Medical Sciences R25 GM56847National Institutes of Health P30 DK026743National Science Foundation (US) 114427NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK026743NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM056847NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007175
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo derive the theoretical basis for the extended clearance model of organ elimination following both oral and IV dosing, and critically analyze the approaches previously taken.

methodsWe derived from first principles the theoretical basis for the extended clearance concept of organ elimination following both oral and IV dosing and critically analyzed previous approaches.

resultsWe point out a number of critical characteristics that have either been misinterpreted or not clearly presented in previously published treatments. First, the extended clearance concept is derived based on the well-stirred model. It is not appropriate to use alternative models of hepatic clearance. In analyzing equations, clearance terms are all intrinsic clearances, not total drug clearances. Flow and protein binding parameters should reflect blood measurements, not plasma values. In calculating the AUC

conclusionsThe extended clearance concept is a powerful tool to evaluate drug-drug interactions, pharmacogenomic and disease state variance but evaluating the AUC

Indexed as

PharmacokineticsAdministration, IntravenousAdministration, OralComputer SimulationDrug InteractionsHumansLiverMetabolic Clearance RateModels, BiologicalPharmaceutical PreparationsProtein BindingPharmaceutical Preparationsextended clearance concepthepatic clearancerate-determining stepwell-stirred model

Identifiers

PMID30349948
PMCPMC6364828
OpenAlexW2896313938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.