ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Applying the estimand framework to clinical pharmacology trials with a case study in bioequivalence.
Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining estimands in anaesthesia clinical trials: a scoping review and framework.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Estimating treatment effects in clinical studies of Alzheimer's disease: What are estimands and why do we need them?Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Review
- Using the ICH estimand framework to improve the interpretation of treatment effects in internet interventions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Applying the estimand framework to clinical pharmacology trials with a case study in bioequivalence.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Review
- Assessing safety and efficacy in subpopulations in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: contextualizing representativeness.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use has published an addendum on estimands and sensitivity analysis in clinical trials along with related training materials. These define an estimand as a precise description of the treatment effect that reflects the scientific question of interest. In December 2022, the US Food and Drug Administration released draft guidance recommending estimands of interest be specified in bioequivalence trial protocols. However, experience in implementing estimands in clinical pharmacology trials is limited and so we introduce estimands and provide step-by-step considerations about the estimand thinking process in this setting. We also describe a particular case study, a bioequivalence trial, illustrating how the estimand framework can provide transparency and alignment throughout the design, conduct and analysis of the trial. This involves discussion of how to identify and handle intercurrent events, which are events that can affect interpretation of the drug or metabolite endpoints. Furthermore, we discuss the broader applicability of the estimand framework to other clinical pharmacology trials. Finally, we encourage further discussion between industry, academia, regulators and the International Council for Harmonisation on whether the estimand framework should be considered in all clinical pharmacology regulatory guidance documents.
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.