ReviewClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2022
Analysis of US Food and Drug Administration Oncology Approvals on the Characterization of Hepatic Impairment Effect and Dosing Recommendations.
Review in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2022. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetics of Binimetinib in Participants with Hepatic Impairment.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2025Article
- A phase I, open-label, single-dose study to evaluate the effect of hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics and safety of futibatinib.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Design and conduct considerations for studies in patients with hepatic impairment.Clinical and translational science · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with cancer and advanced hepatic impairment (HI) (i.e., moderate and severe impairment) are often excluded from first-in-patient, phase II, and phase III studies. Thus, dose recommendations for this subgroup of patients are often derived using a combination of dedicated phase I studies conducted in participants without cancer and a population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling approach. A standardized risk-based approach to guide the evaluation of HI in patients with cancer is needed. In this review, we evaluated available oncology drug approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 1999 to 2019, identified strategies utilized by sponsors to characterize the effect of HI on the PK of oncology drugs, and assessed regulatory expectations for each strategy. Finally, we constructed a decision tree that complements current FDA guidance to enable efficient evaluation of the effect of HI on PK and provide guidance for dose recommendations.
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.