ArticleClinical and translational science2025
Optimization of Bottom-Up PBPK Model Development in SIMCYP via Retrospective Analysis of Clinical Human PK Data.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimization of Bottom-Up PBPK Model Development in SIMCYP via Retrospective Analysis of Clinical Human PK Data.Clinical and translational science · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling has become a major tool in drug discovery and development. Here, we describe the bottom-up PBPK modeling approaches employed at AbbVie using Simcyp Simulator and evaluate the impact of three system parameters, GI physiology, P-gp Relative Expression Factor (REF), and recombinant CYP enzyme (rCYP) intersystem extrapolation factor (ISEF), independently and in combination, on PBPK prediction performance through retrospective analysis of 8 clinical assets. Overall, the application of New GI physiology resulted in a considerable improvement in the prediction of oral absorption for most compounds compared to the Original GI physiology (C
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.