SynthesisCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2023
Skipping a pillar does not make for strong foundations: Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic reasoning behind the shape of dose-response relationships in oncology.
Synthesis in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Skipping a pillar does not make for strong foundations: Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic reasoning behind the shape of dose-response relationships in oncology.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- PK-Informed Microphysiological Systems: From Dynamic Dosing to Quantitative In Vitro-In Vivo Translation.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Role of pharmacometrics and systems pharmacology in facilitating efficient dose optimization in oncology.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dose-response analysis is often applied to the quantification of drug-effect especially for slowly responding disease end points where a comparison is made across dose levels after a particular period of treatment. It has long been recognized that exposure - response is more appropriate than dose-response. However, trials necessarily are designed as dose-response experiments. Second, a wide range of functional forms are used to express relationships between dose and response. These considerations are also important for clinical development because pharmacokinetic (PK; and variability) plus pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling may allow one to anticipate the shape of the dose-response curve and so the trial design. Here, we describe how the location and steepness of the dose response is determined by the PKs of the compound being tested and its exposure-response relationship in terms of potency (location), efficacy (maximum effect) and Hill coefficient (steepness). Thus, the location (50% effective dose [ED
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.