ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2024
Evaluation and optimization of sample size of neonates and infants for pediatric clinical studies on cefiderocol using a model-based approach.
Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Retrospective Analysis of PK and Response of Oral Ibuprofen in the Treatment of a Patent Ductus Arteriosus in Extremely Low Gestational Age Neonates.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Evaluation and optimization of sample size of neonates and infants for pediatric clinical studies on cefiderocol using a model-based approach.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 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
Abstract
When planning pediatric clinical trials, optimizing the sample size of neonates/infants is essential because it is difficult to enroll these subjects. In this simulation study, we evaluated the sample size of neonates/infants using a model-based optimal approach for identifying their pharmacokinetics for cefiderocol. We assessed the usefulness of data for estimation performance (accuracy and variance of parameter estimation) from adults and the impact of data from very young subjects, including preterm neonates. Stochastic simulation and estimation were utilized to assess the impact of sample size allocation for age categories in estimation performance for population pharmacokinetic parameters in pediatrics. The inclusion of adult pharmacokinetic information improved the estimation performance of population pharmacokinetic parameters as the coefficient of variation (CV) range of parameter estimation decreased from 4.9%-593.7% to 2.3%-17.3%. When sample size allocation was based on the age groups of gestational age and postnatal age, the data showed 15 neonates/infants would be necessary to appropriately estimate pediatric pharmacokinetic parameters (<20%CV). By using the postmenstrual age (PMA), which is theoretically considered to be associated with the maturation of organs, the number of neonates/infants required for appropriate parameter estimation could be reduced to seven (one and six with <32 and >32 weeks PMA, respectively) to nine (three and six with <37 and >37 weeks PMA, respectively) subjects. The model-based optimal design approach allowed efficient evaluation of the sample size of neonates/infants for estimation of pediatric pharmacokinetic parameters. This approach to assessment should be useful when designing pediatric clinical trials, especially those including young children.
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.