Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33396805›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2020

The Neonatal and Juvenile Pig in Pediatric Drug Discovery and Development.

Miriam Ayuso, Laura Buyssens, Marina Stroe, Allan Valenzuela, Karel Allegaert, Anne Smits, Pieter Annaert, Antonius Mulder, Sebastien Carpentier, Chris Van Ginneken and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. BoneJBMR plus · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Nanomedicine Therapies for Pediatric Diseases.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology
    Review
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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Miriam AyusoComparative Perinatal Development, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Laura BuyssensComparative Perinatal Development, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-2167-4173
Marina StroeComparative Perinatal Development, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Allan ValenzuelaComparative Perinatal Development, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-6695-1779
Karel AllegaertDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9921-5105
Anne SmitsDepartment of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Pieter AnnaertDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3525-7351
Antonius MulderDepartment of Neonatology, University Hospital Antwerp, 2650 Edegem, Belgium.
Sebastien CarpentierFacility for SYstems BIOlogy Mass Spectrometry, KULeuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Chris Van GinnekenComparative Perinatal Development, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Steven Van CruchtenComparative Perinatal Development, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3144-1840
University of Antwerp · BEKU Leuven · BEErasmus MC · NLUniversitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BE

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 programme 777554Herculesstichting AUHA/13/006Research Foundation Flanders G0D0520NSpecial Research Fund of the University of Antwerp 26733Special Research Fund of the University of Antwerp 34479Special Research Fund of the University of Antwerp 42354
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pharmacotherapy in pediatric patients is challenging in view of the maturation of organ systems and processes that affect pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Especially for the youngest age groups and for pediatric-only indications, neonatal and juvenile animal models can be useful to assess drug safety and to better understand the mechanisms of diseases or conditions. In this respect, the use of neonatal and juvenile pigs in the field of pediatric drug discovery and development is promising, although still limited at this point. This review summarizes the comparative postnatal development of pigs and humans and discusses the advantages of the juvenile pig in view of developmental pharmacology, pediatric diseases, drug discovery and drug safety testing. Furthermore, limitations and unexplored aspects of this large animal model are covered. At this point in time, the potential of the neonatal and juvenile pig as nonclinical safety models for pediatric drug development is underexplored.

Indexed as

drug developmentdrug discoverydrug safetyjuvenile pig modelPBPKpediatric pharmacologytranslational research

Identifiers

PMID33396805
PMCPMC7823749
OpenAlexW3114470055

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.