ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2022
Inferring pulmonary exposure based on clinical PK data: accuracy and precision of model-based deconvolution methods.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Determining and understanding the target-site exposure in clinical studies remains challenging. This is especially true for oral drug inhalation for local treatment, where the target-site is identical to the site of drug absorption, i.e., the lungs. Modeling and simulation based on clinical pharmacokinetic (PK) data may be a valid approach to infer the pulmonary fate of orally inhaled drugs, even without local measurements. In this work, a simulation-estimation study was systematically applied to investigate five published model structures for pulmonary drug absorption. First, these models were compared for structural identifiability and how choosing an inadequate model impacts the inference on pulmonary exposure. Second, in the context of the population approach both sequential and simultaneous parameter estimation methods after intravenous administration and oral inhalation were evaluated with typically applied models. With an adequate model structure and a well-characterized systemic PK after intravenous dosing, the error in inferring pulmonary exposure and retention times was less than twofold in the majority of evaluations. Whether a sequential or simultaneous parameter estimation was applied did not affect the inferred pulmonary PK to a relevant degree. One scenario in the population PK analysis demonstrated biased pulmonary exposure metrics caused by inadequate estimation of systemic PK parameters. Overall, it was demonstrated that empirical modeling of intravenous and inhalation PK datasets provided robust estimates regarding accuracy and bias for the pulmonary exposure and pulmonary retention, even in presence of the high variability after drug inhalation.
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.