ArticleThe AAPS journal2025
Operating Characteristics of the Simulated Healthy Participant Approach in Impaired Clearance Studies.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimizing harm is a cornerstone of ethical research practices. A drug that has undergone extensive clinical pharmacological testing in healthy participants (HPs) and a diverse selection of patients can be described with a sufficiently predictive population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model. In impaired clearance trials, recruitment is minimized and underpowered for all but major exposure differences. Virtual HP arms have been reported to support similar conclusions to conventional impaired clearance studies, and further minimize potential harm of drug exposure without medical benefit by eliminating an arm of the study. However, the extent to which the conventional analysis of impairment studies compare to the simulation approach is unknown. Here we assess the operating characteristics of the virtual cohort approach along with the conventional approach through controlled simulations. These simulations included a simple, widely accessible PopPK model and several internal models that have been used in a previous meta-analysis of the virtual cohort approach. In the pairwise comparisons assessed, the virtual cohort simulation approach had greater power per sample size than the conventional approach and the same power under the null hypothesis. Given key methodological differences, it is recommended that the simulation and conventional approaches be treated as having approximately the same power under equivalent conditions. These results provide a strong justification for the use of the virtual cohort approach when an adequate PopPK model is available, minimizing unnecessary exposure to study drugs that will not benefit healthy study participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39843663What 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.