Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32275768›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2020

Does In Vitro Potency Predict Clinically Efficacious Concentrations?

Rasmus Jansson-Löfmark, Stephan Hjorth, Johan Gabrielsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing 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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. In vitro γ-aminobutyric acid A (GABACommunications chemistry · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Drug Discovery and Repurposing forJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Rasmus Jansson-LöfmarkDMPK, Research and Early Development Cardiovascular, Renal and Metabolism, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Stephan HjorthDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Institute of Medicine, The Sahlgrenska Academy at Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Johan GabrielssonDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Veterinary Public Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

UCSF Liver Core CenterP30DK026743 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Jennifer Y. Chen · 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
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK026743NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM056847
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The in vitro affinity of a compound for its target is an important feature in drug discovery, but what remains is how predictive in vitro properties are of in vivo therapeutic drug exposure. We assessed the relationship between in vitro potency and clinically efficacious concentrations for marketed small molecule drugs (n = 164) and how they may differ depending on therapeutic indication, mode of action, receptor type, target localization, and function. Approximately 70% of compounds had a therapeutic unbound plasma exposure lower than in vitro potency; the median ratio of exposure in relation to in vitro potency was 0.32, and 80% had ratios within the range of 0.007 to 8.7. We identified differences in the in vivo-to-in vitro potency ratio between indications, mode of action, target type, and matrix localization, and whether or not the drugs had active metabolites. The in vitro-assay variability contributions appeared to be the smallest; within the same drug target and mode of action the within-variability was slightly broader; but both were substantially less compared with the overall distribution of ratios. These data suggest that in vitro potency conditions, estimated in vivo potency, required level of receptor occupancy, and target turnover are key components for further understanding the link between clinical drug exposure and in vitro potency.

Indexed as

Administration, OralBiological AvailabilityBiotransformationDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug DevelopmentDrug MonitoringHumansLigandsModels, BiologicalPharmaceutical PreparationsProtein BindingTranslational Research, BiomedicalLigandsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID32275768
PMCPMC7484912

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.