Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8732950›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives1996

Scaling basic toxicokinetic parameters from rat to man.

K Bachmann, D Pardoe, D White

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Gonadotrophins: The future.Journal of human reproductive sciences
    Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

K BachmannDepartment of Pharmacology, University of Toledo, OH 43606, USA.
D Pardoe
D White
University of Toledo · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scaling of the quantified dispositional parameters of xenobiotics from animals to man is of interest from the standpoint of toxicology (e.g., poisoning and risk assessment). Scaling is also important from the standpoint of therapeutics because it represents a strategy for predicting first-use-in-human doses in clinical trials of investigational new drugs. Current strategies for scaling either doses of xenobiotics or the dispositional parameters of xenobiotics from animals to man rely on models that take account principally of species differences in weight or body surface area. Interspecies scaling of dispositional parameters such as clearance or volume of distribution commonly involves the comparison of estimates of these parameters for a given xenobiotic among numerous species on the basis of weight with the resultant mathematical relationship used to predict the values of those parameters for that xenobiotic in a species weighing, on average, about 70 kg (i.e., a man). Our approach has been to ascertain whether a useful mathematical model could be developed for predicting the dispositional parameters of a xenobiotic, its half-life and volume of distribution, in humans based exclusively on estimates of those parameters in rats. Based on a data set of about 100 different xenobiotics, we found that values for half-life and volume of distribution of a xenobiotic in humans can be predicted from the estimates of those parameters in rats.

Indexed as

AnimalsHalf-LifeHumansModels, BiologicalRatsSpecies SpecificityXenobioticsXenobiotics

Identifiers

PMID8732950
PMCPMC1469326
OpenAlexW2077937196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.