Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2016
Limited sampling strategy for determining metformin area under the plasma concentration-time curve.
Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utilization of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Modeling in Pharmacoepidemiological Studies: A Systematic Review on Antiarrhythmic and Glucose-Lowering Medicines.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Limited sampling strategy for determining metformin area under the plasma concentration-time curve.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2016Trial
- Oral and intravenous pharmacokinetics of metformin with and without oral codeine intake in healthy subjects: A cross-over study.Clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Article
- Influence of pharmacogenetic polymorphisms and demographic variables on metformin pharmacokinetics in an admixed Brazilian cohort.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim was to develop and validate limited sampling strategy (LSS) models to predict the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) for metformin.
methodsMetformin plasma concentrations (n = 627) at 0-24 h after a single 500 mg dose were used for LSS development, based on all subsets linear regression analysis. The LSS-derived AUC(0,24 h) was compared with the parameter 'best estimate' obtained by non-compartmental analysis using all plasma concentration data points. Correlation between the LSS-derived and the best estimated AUC(0,24 h) (r(2) ), bias and precision of the LSS estimates were quantified. The LSS models were validated in independent cohorts.
resultsA two-point (3 h and 10 h) regression equation with no intercept estimated accurately the individual AUC(0,24 h) in the development cohort: r(2) = 0.927, bias (mean, 95% CI) -0.5, -2.7-1.8% and precision 6.3, 4.9-7.7%. The accuracy of the two point LSS model was verified in study cohorts of individuals receiving single 500 or 1000 mg (r(2) = -0.933-0.934) or seven 1000 mg daily doses (r(2) = 0.918), as well as using data from 16 published studies covering a wide range of metformin doses, demographics, clinical and experimental conditions (r(2) = 0.976). The LSS model reproduced previously reported results for effects of polymorphisms in OCT2 and MATE1 genes on AUC(0,24 h) and renal clearance of metformin.
conclusionsThe two point LSS algorithm may be used to assess the systemic exposure to metformin under diverse conditions, with reduced costs of sampling and analysis, and saving time for both subjects and investigators.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.