Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31244958›Full record

ReviewTheranostics2019

Research tools for extrapolating the disposition and pharmacokinetics of nanomaterials from preclinical animals to humans.

Michael S Valic, Gang Zheng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Theranostics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Exemplifying interspecies variation of liposomeActa pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024
    Article
  13. Predicting tissue distribution and tumor delivery of nanoparticles in mice using machine learning models.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Addressing systemic problems with exposure assessments to protect the public's health.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2023
    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

2 authors.

Michael S ValicPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA, M5G 1L7.
Gang ZhengPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA, M5G 1L7.

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A critical step in the translational science of nanomaterials from preclinical animal studies to humans is the comprehensive investigation of their disposition (or ADME) and pharmacokinetic behaviours. Disposition and pharmacokinetic data are ideally collected in different animal species (rodent and nonrodent), at different dose levels, and following multiple administrations. These data are used to assess the systemic exposure and effect to nanomaterials, primary determinants of their potential toxicity and therapeutic efficacy. At toxic doses in animal models, pharmacokinetic (termed toxicokinetic) data are related to toxicologic findings that inform the design of nonclinical toxicity studies and contribute to the determination of the maximum recommended starting dose in clinical phase 1 trials. Nanomaterials present a unique challenge for disposition and pharmacokinetic investigations owing to their prolonged circulation times, nonlinear pharmacokinetic profiles, and their extensive distribution into tissues. Predictive relationships between nanomaterial physicochemical properties and behaviours in vivo are lacking and are confounded by anatomical, physiological, and immunological differences amongst preclinical animal models and humans. These challenges are poorly understood and frequently overlooked by investigators, leading to inaccurate assumptions of disposition, pharmacokinetic, and toxicokinetics profiles across species that can have profoundly detrimental impacts for nonclinical toxicity studies and clinical phase 1 trials. Herein are highlighted two research tools for analysing and interpreting disposition and pharmacokinetic data from multiple species and for extrapolating this data accurately in humans. Empirical methodologies and mechanistic mathematical modelling approaches are discussed with emphasis placed on important considerations and caveats for representing nanomaterials, such as the importance of integrating physiological variables associated with the mononuclear phagocyte system (MPS) into extrapolation methods for nanomaterials. The application of these tools will be examined in recent examples of investigational and clinically approved nanomaterials. Finally, strategies for applying these extrapolation tools in a complementary manner to perform dose predictions and in silico toxicity assessments in humans will be explained. A greater familiarity with the available tools and prior experiences of extrapolating nanomaterial disposition and pharmacokinetics from preclinical animal models to humans will hopefully result in a more straightforward roadmap for the clinical translation of promising nanomaterials.

Indexed as

Tissue DistributionAnimalsDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansModels, TheoreticalNanostructuresPharmaceutical PreparationsTranslational Research, BiomedicalPharmaceutical PreparationsADMEinterspecies allometric scalingnanomaterialspharmacokineticsphysiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling

Identifiers

PMID31244958
PMCPMC6567967

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.