ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2024
Preclinical Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Studies and Clinical Trials in the Drug Development Process of EMA-Approved Antifungal Agents: A Review.
Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antifungal drug development is essential as invasive fungal disease is still associated with a very high mortality rate and the emergence of resistant species in the last decade. In Europe, the European Medical Agency (EMA) approves antifungals and publishes the European Public Assessment Report (EPAR) including the information leading up to the authorisation. We looked at EMA-approved antifungals and their reports within the last 23 years. We focused primarily on the role of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic indices in antifungal development and the level of information depicted in their corresponding report. Furthermore, we investigated guidelines applicable to the development process at the time and compared the content with a focus on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies and preclinical requirements. Since 2000, six new antifungal substances have been authorised. Most were authorised for treatment of Candida infections or Aspergillus infections but also included rarer pathogens. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic indices were scarcely investigated and/or mentioned in the report. Current antifungal EMA guidelines started emphasising investigating pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic indices in 2010 and then again in 2016. It remains to be seen how this translates into the authorisation process for new antifungals.
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.