Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36107395›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2022

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Rucaparib.

Mingxiang Liao, Jeri Beltman, Heidi Giordano, Thomas C Harding, Lara Maloney, Andrew D Simmons, Jim J Xiao

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2022. 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Synthetic strategies and therapeutic insights into FDA-approved indole-containing drugs.Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry · 2026
    Review
  2. Ubiquitin System-Driven Proteostasis in DNA Damage Response.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Role of PARP inhibitors in prostate cancer.Central European journal of urology · 2024
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mingxiang LiaoClovis Oncology, Inc., 500 Flatiron Pkwy, Suite 100, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA.
Jeri BeltmanClovis Oncology, Inc., 500 Flatiron Pkwy, Suite 100, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA.
Heidi GiordanoClovis Oncology, Inc., 500 Flatiron Pkwy, Suite 100, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA.
Thomas C HardingClovis Oncology, Inc., 500 Flatiron Pkwy, Suite 100, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA.
Lara MaloneyClovis Oncology, Inc., 500 Flatiron Pkwy, Suite 100, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA.
Andrew D SimmonsClovis Oncology, Inc., 500 Flatiron Pkwy, Suite 100, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA.
Jim J XiaoClovis Oncology, Inc., 500 Flatiron Pkwy, Suite 100, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA. jxiao@clovisoncology.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3632-2012
Clovis Oncology (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rucaparib is an oral small-molecule poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor indicated for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer in the maintenance and treatment settings and for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer associated with a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Rucaparib has a manageable safety profile; the most common adverse events reported were fatigue and nausea in both indications. Accumulation in plasma exposure occurred after repeated administration of the approved 600-mg twice-daily dosage. Steady state was achieved after continuous twice-daily dosing for a week. Rucaparib has moderate oral bioavailability and can be dosed with or without food. Although a high-fat meal weakly increased maximum concentration and area under the curve, the effect was not clinically significant. A mass balance analysis indicated almost a complete dose recovery of rucaparib over 12 days, with metabolism, renal, and hepatic excretion as the elimination routes. A population pharmacokinetic analysis of rucaparib revealed no effect of age, sex, race, or body weight. No starting dose adjustments were necessary for patients with mild-to-moderate hepatic or renal impairment; the effect of severe organ impairment on rucaparib exposure has not been evaluated. In patients, rucaparib moderately inhibited cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 and weakly inhibited CYP3As, CYP2C9, and CYP2C19. Rucaparib weakly increased systemic exposures of oral contraceptives and oral rosuvastatin and marginally increased the exposure of oral digoxin (a P-glycoprotein substrate). In vitro studies suggested that rucaparib inhibits transporters MATE1, MATE2-K, OCT1, and OCT2. No clinically meaningful drug interactions with rucaparib as a perpetrator were observed. An exposure-response analysis revealed dose-dependent changes in selected clinical efficacy and safety endpoints. Overall, this article provides a comprehensive review of the clinical pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug-drug interactions, effects of intrinsic and extrinsic factors, and exposure-response relationships of rucaparib.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalDrug InteractionsHumansIndolesMalePoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsAntineoplastic AgentsIndolesPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitorsrucaparib

Identifiers

PMID36107395
PMCPMC9652254
OpenAlexW4295898359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.