ArticleBMJ open2024
Is personal physiology-based rapid prediction digital twin for minimal effective fentanyl dose better than standard practice: a pilot study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Review of Virtual Twins in Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Application of Digital Twin Technology to Enhance Chronic Diseases Management: A Systematic Review.International journal of telemedicine and applications · 2026Review
- Exploring the Potential of Digital Twins in Cancer Treatment: A Narrative Review of Reviews.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- From virtual to reality: innovative practices of digital twins in tumor therapy.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- From data-driven cities to data-driven tumors: dynamic digital twins for adaptive oncology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Personalised Transdermal Therapy for Chronic Pain with Digital Twin Technology.Current drug targets · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatients with advanced cancer frequently suffer from chronic, severe disabling pain. Opioids such as morphine and fentanyl are commonly used to manage this pain. Transdermal drug delivery systems are important technologies for administering drugs in a non-invasive, continuous and controlled manner. Due to the narrow therapeutic range of fentanyl, individualised dosing is essential to avoid underdosing or overdosing. Standard clinical calculation tools for opioid rotation however do not include important patient characteristics that account for interindividual variability of opioid pharmacology. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We developed a clinical protocol to optimise individual fentanyl dosing in patients with advanced cancer switching from oral or intravenous opioids to transdermal fentanyl by using a physics-based digital twin (DT) that is fed by important clinical and physiological parameters. Individual tailoring of transdermal fentanyl therapy is an approach with the potential for personalised and effective care with an improved benefit-risk ratio. However, clinical validation of physics-based digital twins (PBDT) dosing is crucial to proving clinical benefit.Therapeutic drug monitoring will allow to validate the accuracy of PBDT predictions. Additional monitoring for breathing dynamics, sequential pain levels and fentanyl-related adverse events will contribute to evaluating the performance of PBDT-based dosing of transdermal fentanyl. The primary objective of the study is to develop an experimental protocol to validate DT-guided fentanyl dosing in patients with advanced cancer. This clinical study will bring individualised opioid dosing closer to clinical practice. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study documents have been approved by the responsible Ethics Committee and study initiation is planned for late summer 2024. Data will be shared with the scientific community no more than 1 year following completion of the study and data assembly.
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.