Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32356105›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2020

Preclinical Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Studies and Clinical Trials in the Drug Development Process of EMA-Approved Antibacterial Agents: A Review.

Anselm Jorda, Markus Zeitlinger

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Pharmaceutics · 2021
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anselm JordaDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Markus ZeitlingerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. markus.zeitlinger@meduniwien.ac.at.
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Development of new antibacterial agents is necessary as drug-resistant bacteria are a threat to global health. In Europe, the European Medicines Agency has been guiding this development process for more than two decades. We investigated preclinical and clinical pre-approval studies to illuminate the current authorization process with emphasis on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic approaches and clinical phases. All centrally authorized systemic antibacterial and antimycobacterial drugs within the European Union were included without any time restriction. Additionally, US Food and Drug Administration-approved antibiotics of the previous 3 years, which were not yet approved by the European Medicines Agency, were included. We focused on preclinical pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies and phase II and phase III clinical trials. Furthermore, we looked at the recommended dosing regimens and approved indications. In this review, we designed tree diagrams as a new means of illustrating the development process of antibiotics to relate pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic phase II and III studies to approved indications. We included 23 (European Medicines Agency, 18; US Food and Drug Administration, 5) antimicrobial agents. Tetracyclines, carbapenems, and cephalosporins were the leading classes. The recommended dosing intervals were significantly shorter in time- vs exposure-dependent drugs (median 8 vs 12, p = 0.006). The majority of approved indications (i.e., acute bacterial skin and soft-tissue infection, community-acquired pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infection, complicated urinary tract infection, and complicated skin and soft-tissue infection) used non-inferiority trials. Phase II and III clinical trials investigating community-acquired pneumonia involved the fewest patients. Some promising drugs were marketed in recent years; the individual steps to their authorizations are illuminated. We confirmed the relevance of preclinical pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies in dosing optimization and decision making in antimicrobial drug development. Non-inferiority clinical trials predominated.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDrug DevelopmentCarbapenemsCephalosporinsClinical Trials as TopicEuropeHumansUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAnti-Bacterial AgentsCarbapenemsCephalosporins

Identifiers

PMID32356105
PMCPMC7467913
OpenAlexW3023154072

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.