Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33022770›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2021

A Systematic Assessment of US Food and Drug Administration Dosing Recommendations For Drug Development Programs Amenable to Response-Guided Titration.

Lingshan Wang, Kimberly Maxfield, Daphne Guinn, Rajanikanth Madabushi, Issam Zineh, Robert N Schuck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Lingshan WangOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Kimberly MaxfieldOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Daphne GuinnOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Rajanikanth MadabushiOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Issam ZinehOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Robert N SchuckOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Intramural FDA HHS FD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A key goal in drug development is optimized dosing for patients. Interactions between drug developers and regulatory scientists throughout development are important for the optimization of dosing and serve as a forum to discuss approaches for optimal dosing, such as precision or individualized dosing. To date, there has not been a systematic assessment of the advice provided by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to drug developers from an individualized dosing perspective. Here, we reviewed FDA recommendations on dose selection for efficacy trials at end-of-phase meetings between the FDA and drug developers for 76 new molecular entities approved between 2013 and 2017 that are considered amenable for an individualized dosing method, response-guided titration. Forty FDA dosing recommendations were identified as specific to dose selection and design of the respective efficacy trials and subsequently: (i) characterized based on if they were supportive of individualized dosing and (ii) compared with dosing regimens used in efficacy trials and labeling at approval to evaluate if FDA recommendations were implemented. Of these 40 recommendations for efficacy trials, 35 (88%) were considered supportive of individualized dosing. Eighteen of these 40 recommendations (45%) were incorporated into efficacy trials and 11 (28%) were incorporated into labeling. This research suggests that early FDA-sponsor interactions can support the study of doses in efficacy trials that may lead to individualized dosing strategies in labeling.

Indexed as

Drug ApprovalDrug DevelopmentDrug Dosage CalculationsDrug LabelingHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsPrecision MedicineResearch DesignUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID33022770
PMCPMC7902398

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.