Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33742783›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2021

A pharmacokinetic simulation study to assess the performance of a sparse blood sampling approach to quantify early drug exposure.

Abhishek G Sathe, Richard C Brundage, Vijay Ivaturi, James C Cloyd, James M Chamberlain, Jordan J Elm, Robert Silbergleit, Jaideep Kapur, Lisa D Coles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Abhishek G SatheDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Richard C BrundageDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Vijay IvaturiCenter for Translational Medicine, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
James C CloydDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
James M ChamberlainDivision of Emergency Medicine, Children's National Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Jordan J ElmDepartment of Public Health Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Robert SilbergleitDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Jaideep KapurDepartment of Neurology and Department of Neuroscience, Brain Institute, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Lisa D ColesDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) - SDMCU01NS088023 · NINDS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI ELM, JORDAN J. · 2014 to 2018
$2.0M
ESETT Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic StudyR01NS099653 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI CLOYD, JAMES C., COLES, LISA D · 2017 to 2019
$1.0M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS099653NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS088023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Estimating early exposure of drugs used for the treatment of emergent conditions is challenging because blood sampling to measure concentrations is difficult. The objective of this work was to evaluate predictive performance of two early concentrations and prior pharmacokinetic (PK) information for estimating early exposure. The performance of a modeling approach was compared with a noncompartmental analysis (NCA). A simulation study was performed using literature-based models for phenytoin (PHT), levetiracetam (LEV), and valproic acid (VPA). These models were used to simulate rich concentration-time profiles from 0 to 2 h. Profiles without residual unexplained variability (RUV) were used to obtain the true partial area under the curve (pAUC) until 2 h after the start of drug infusion. From the profiles with the RUV, two concentrations per patient were randomly selected. These concentrations were analyzed under a population model to obtain individual population PK (PopPK) pAUCs. The NCA pAUCs were calculated using a linear trapezoidal rule. Percent prediction errors (PPEs) for the PopPK pAUCs and NCA pAUCs were calculated. A PPE within ±20% of the true value was considered a success and the number of successes was obtained for 100 simulated datasets. For PHT, LEV, and VPA, respectively, the median value of the success statistics obtained using the PopPK approach of 81%, 92%, and 88% were significantly higher than the 72%, 80%, and 67% using the NCA approach (p < 0.05; Mann-Whitney U test). This study provides a means by which early exposure can be estimated with good precision from two concentrations and a PopPK approach. It can be applied to other settings in which early exposures are of interest.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAdolescentAdultArea Under CurveBiological Variation, PopulationBlood Specimen CollectionChildChild, PreschoolComputer SimulationDrug MonitoringEmergency TreatmentFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansLevetiracetamMaleLevetiracetamPhenytoinValproic Acid

Identifiers

PMID33742783
PMCPMC8301574

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.