ArticleBiology of sex differences2020
Sex differences in pharmacokinetics predict adverse drug reactions in women.
Article in Biology of sex differences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 363 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
363 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 735 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inclusion of sex and gender in clinical practice guidelines: an umbrella review.BMJ open quality · 2026Pooled it
- Model-based meta-analysis of individual patient data for the characterization of intravenous 5-fluorouracil population pharmacokinetics.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of female underrepresentation in trials investigating long-term pharmacologic therapy after acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2026Pooled it
- Educational strategies for integrating gender perspectives in health professions training: a systematic review to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Comprehensive safety analysis of adverse events associated with eptinezumab in migraine treatment.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative bioavailability of three benznidazole formulations in healthy individuals: a randomised study.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 2026Trial
- Efficacy of a mobile health application on self-management among Japanese patients with chronic kidney disease.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2025Trial
- Assessment of Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Volume-Dependent Conductive Hearing Loss in Healthy Volunteers: First-in-Human, Open-Label, Placebo-Controlled Study of a Single Intratympanic Injection of AC102.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2025Trial
- Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of NIM-1324 an Oral LANCL2 Agonist in a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase I Clinical Trial.Clinical and translational science · 2025Trial
- Early antibiotic exposure and vaccine immune responses in preterm infants: potential sex-specific differences.Gut microbes · 2026Observational
- LPS stimulation reveals male and female dimorphism in human iPSC-derived macrophages.iScience · 2026Article
- Pharmacovigilance signal detection of rilonacept using FAERS with exploratory Mendelian randomization analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Redesigning cardiovascular medicine around sex differences.Nature medicine · 2026Review
- Investigator Gender Influence on Female Enrollment in Multicenter Vascular Trials: A Site-Level Analysis.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
- A Disproportionality Analysis of β-lactam Antibiotic Related Blood and Lymphatic System Disorders Based on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System Database.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Reporting patterns of adverse drug withdrawal events using individual case safety reports in the FAERS and Eudravigilance databases.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Surface chemistry governs sex-dependent responses to PEG and zwitterionic siRNA nanocarriers in primary macrophages.Science advances · 2026Article
- Prescription Medication Use Among Women Aged 40 and Older in the United States from 1999 to 2020.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2026Article
- Plasma Carbamazepine and Carbamazepine-Epoxide Concentrations as Indicators of Consciousness Impairment in Acute Poisoning: A Sex-Based Analysis.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2026Article
- Sex-Related Differences in Physiologically-Based Biopharmaceutics Modeling.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Article
303 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen experience adverse drug reactions, ADRs, nearly twice as often as men, yet the role of sex as a biological factor in the generation of ADRs is poorly understood. Most drugs currently in use were approved based on clinical trials conducted on men, so women may be overmedicated. We determined whether sex differences in drug pharmacokinetics, PKs, predict sex differences in ADRs.
methodsSearches of the ISI Web of Science and PubMed databases were conducted with combinations of the terms: drugs, sex or gender, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug safety, drug dose, and adverse drug reaction, which yielded over 5000 articles with considerable overlap. We obtained information from each relevant article on significant sex differences in PK measures, predominantly area under the curve, peak/maximum concentrations, and clearance/elimination rates. ADRs were identified from every relevant article and recorded categorically as female-biased, male-biased, or not sex-biased.
resultsFor most of the FDA-approved drugs examined, elevated blood concentrations and longer elimination times were manifested by women, and these PKs were strongly linked to sex differences in ADRs. Of the 86 drugs evaluated, 76 had higher PK values in women; for 59 drugs with clinically identifiable ADRs, sex-biased PKs predicted the direction of sex-biased ADRs in 88% of cases. Ninety-six percent of drugs with female-biased PK values were associated with a higher incidence of ADRs in women than men, but only 29% of male-biased PKs predicted male-biased ADRs. Accessible PK information is available for only a small fraction of all drugs
conclusionsSex differences in pharmacokinetics strongly predict sex-specific ADRs for women but not men. This sex difference was not explained by sex differences in body weight. The absence of sex-stratified PK information in public records for hundreds of drugs raises the concern that sex differences in PK values are widespread and of clinical significance. The common practice of prescribing equal drug doses to women and men neglects sex differences in pharmacokinetics and dimorphisms in body weight, risks overmedication of women, and contributes to female-biased adverse drug reactions. We recommend evidence-based dose reductions for women to counteract this sex bias.
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.