ArticleClinical and translational science2024
The estimation and translation uncertainties in applying NOAEL to clinical dose escalation.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2024. 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.
- Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling to Predict Human Starting Dose and Pharmacokinetics for Rocbrutinib.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Rewriting paracelsus: linking chemical assessment to public health.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Review
- The estimation and translation uncertainties in applying NOAEL to clinical dose escalation.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The systemic exposure at the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) estimated from animals is an important criterion commonly applied to guard the safety of participants in clinical trials of investigational drugs. However, the discrepancy in toxicity profile between species is widely recognized. The objective of the work reported here was to assess, via simulation, the level of uncertainty in the NOAEL estimated from an animal species and the effectiveness of applying its associated exposure value to minimizing the toxicity risk to human. Simulations were conducted for dose escalation of an investigational new chemical entity with hypothetical exposure-response models for the dose-limiting toxicity under a variety of conditions, in terms of between-species relative sensitivity to the toxicity and the between-subject variability in the key parameters determining the sensitivity and pharmacokinetics. Results show a high uncertainty in the NOAEL estimation. Notably, even when the animal species and humans are assumed to have the same sensitivity, which may not be realistic, limiting clinical dose to the exposure at the NOAEL that has been identified in the animals carries a high risk of either causing toxicity or under-dosing, hence undermining the therapeutic potential of the drug candidate. These findings highlight the importance of understanding the mechanism of the toxicity profile and its cross-species translatability, as well as the importance of understanding the dose requirement for achieving adequate pharmacology.
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.