ArticleEuropean journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences2025
Response to the commentary on "are all measures of liver Kp
Article in European journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2025. 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.
- Mathematical Modeling in Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics: Correct In Vitro, Not Always Valid In Vivo.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Net Influx Rather Than Directional Rates: Re-evaluating Transporter Characterization In Vivo and In Vitro for Renal and Hepatic Clearance.The AAPS journal · 2025Review
- Simplifying Pharmacokinetics, Applying it to Drug and Dosage Form Development, and Making Drug Dosage Decisions in Clinical Medicine: The Adaptation of Kirchhoff's Laws from Physics.The AAPS journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recently, Sugano commented on our above-titled publication stating that he was a reviewer for the paper. In the Acknowledgements, Sugano indicated that we "kindly suggested publishing the reviewer report as an article". What we had actually written was: "prior to accepting the [unidentified] reviewer's approach, however, we believe he/she would have to publish a paper justifying the methodology and proposing how in vivo clinical data could be analyzed with such methodology". We further explained the fallacy of the accepted mechanistic models of hepatic elimination in a subsequent manuscript titled "Pharmacokinetic theory must consider published experimental data", published online a month after the Sugano commentary became available -not in time for the author to review the full explanation before his commentary was published. Our above-titled publication makes no assumptions or discussions regarding how Kp
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.