ArticleEJNMMI research2022
Comparison of absorbed dose extrapolation methods for mouse-to-human translation of radiolabelled macromolecules.
Article in EJNMMI research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utility of Preclinical Dosimetry for First-in-Human Studies with PET Drugs Labeled with Common Radionuclides: A Systematic Review of Radiation Dose Estimates.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Preclinical Validation of [Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Article
- PET Imaging of CD38 and IND enabling studies of [Molecular imaging and biology · 2026Article
- Preclinical evaluation of DOTAGA.Glu.(FAPI)European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Article
- Radiopharmaceutical kit to prepare Copper-64 labelled porphyrin-lipid nanoparticles for radiotracer imaging studies in cancer patients.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Advancing Theranostics Dosimetry for Cancer Therapy: a Review.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Review
- Heterogeneity of absorbed dose distribution in kidney tissues and dose-response modelling of nephrotoxicity in radiopharmaceutical therapy with beta-particle emitters: A review.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2024Review
- EANM guidance document: dosimetry for first-in-human studies and early phase clinical trials.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- MIB Guides: Preclinical Radiopharmaceutical Dosimetry.Molecular imaging and biology · 2024Article
- From bench to bedside:EJNMMI research · 2023Article
- Pre-clinical investigation of astatine-211-parthanatine for high-risk neuroblastoma.Communications biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExtrapolation of human absorbed doses (ADs) from biodistribution experiments on laboratory animals is used to predict the efficacy and toxicity profiles of new radiopharmaceuticals. Comparative studies between available animal-to-human dosimetry extrapolation methods are missing. We compared five computational methods for mice-to-human AD extrapolations, using two different radiopharmaceuticals, namely [
resultsFor both radiopharmaceuticals, the five extrapolation methods showed significantly different AD results (p < 0.0001). In general, organ ADs obtained with M3 were higher than those obtained with the other methods. For [
conclusionsAvailable methods for mouse-to-human dosimetry extrapolations provided significantly different results in two different experimental models. For [
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.