Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36451855›Full record

ReviewTheranostics2022

Current use and future potential of (physiologically based) pharmacokinetic modelling of radiopharmaceuticals: a review.

Hinke Siebinga, Berlinda J de Wit-van der Veen, Marcel D M Stokkel, Alwin D R Huitema, Jeroen J M A Hendrikx

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Theranostics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Applications of artificial intelligence in nuclear medicine.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. EANM guidance document: dosimetry for first-in-human studies and early phase clinical trials.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Advances and challenges in immunoPET methodology.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2024
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors.

Hinke SiebingaDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Berlinda J de Wit-van der VeenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcel D M StokkelDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alwin D R HuitemaDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jeroen J M A HendrikxDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Drug DevelopmentRadiopharmaceuticalsDatabases, FactualHumansRadiopharmaceuticalsPBPK modelpharmacokineticsPK modelpopulation pharmacokinetic modelradiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID36451855
PMCPMC9706588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.