Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36518546›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational research2022

A comparison of different methods for the first-in-pediatric dose selection.

Iftekhar Mahmood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational research, 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

1 author.

Iftekhar MahmoodMahmood Clinical Pharmacology Consultancy, LLC, Rockville, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aim: To conduct a pediatric clinical trial, it is important to optimize pediatric dose as accurately as possible. This is mainly because due to ethical reasons, children cannot be given several doses to evaluate pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of a drug. Methods: In this study, several simple methods to project a first-in-pediatric dose to initiate a clinical trial were evaluated. These methods were as follows:(1) Weight-based pediatric dose prediction (allometric scaling), (2) Salisbury rule (weight-based method), and (3) pediatric dose prediction based on predicted clearance. These methods were compared with the dose given to children in clinical practice. The methods were also compared with whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model ( Results: There were 27 drugs with 113 observations (different age groups from preterm neonates to adolescents). At least, ≤30% prediction error in pediatric dose projection was noted for more than 70% observations. The predictive performance of all the proposed methods was comparable with the whole-body PBPK. Conclusions: The proposed methods are simple and accurate and can be developed on a spreadsheet in a very short period of time. Relevance for Patients: The study provides an estimate of first-in-pediatric dose by simple methods to initiate pediatric clinical trials. Especially, Salisbury rule is based on body weight and is very simple and works fairly well in children >30 kg body weight and can be even used in clinical settings.

Indexed as

age-dependent exponentsbody weightdoseSalisbury rulewhole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic

Identifiers

PMID36518546
PMCPMC9741938

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.