ArticleClinical and translational science2023
A naïve pooled data approach for extrapolation of Phase 0 microdose trials to therapeutic dosing regimens.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A sub-pharmacological test dose does not predict individual docetaxel exposure in prostate cancer patients.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2024Article
- Phase 0 trials/ Intra-Target-Microdosing (ITM) and the lung: a review.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Review
- A naïve pooled data approach for extrapolation of Phase 0 microdose trials to therapeutic dosing regimens.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microdosing is a strategy to obtain knowledge of human pharmacokinetics prior to Phase I clinical trials. The most frequently used method to extrapolate microdose (≤100 μg) pharmacokinetics to therapeutic doses is based on linear extrapolation from a noncompartmental analysis (NCA) with a two-fold acceptance criterion between pharmacokinetic metrics of the extrapolated microdose and the therapeutic dose. The major disadvantage of NCA is the assumption of linear extrapolation of NCA metrics. In this study, we used a naïve pooled data (NPD) modeling approach to extrapolate microdose pharmacokinetics to therapeutic pharmacokinetics. Gemcitabine and anastrozole were used as examples of intravenous and oral drugs, respectively. Data from microdose studies were used to build a parent-metabolite model for gemcitabine and its metabolite 2',2'-difluorodeoxyuridine (dFdU) and a model for anastrozole. The pharmacokinetic microdose models were extrapolated to therapeutic doses. Extrapolation of the microdose showed differences in pharmacokinetic shape for gemcitabine and dFdU between the simulated and observed therapeutic concentrations, whereas the observed therapeutic concentrations for anastrozole were captured by the extrapolation. This study demonstrated the possible use and feasibility of an NPD modeling approach for the evaluation and application of microdose studies in early drug development. Last, physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling might be an alternative for microdose extrapolation of drugs with complex pharmacokinetics such as gemcitabine.
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.