SynthesisClinical pharmacokinetics2026
Collecting Metabolite Pharmacokinetics in Drug-Drug Interaction Studies: A Review of Industry Practices and Data Utilization.
Synthesis in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSystemic exposure of a sensitive probe is considered a 'gold standard' for assessment of clinical relevance of a potential cytochrome P450 (CYP)-driven drug-drug interaction (DDI). Typically, the change in systemic exposure is judged by the area under the concentration-time curve [AUC]) of the parent, but sometimes metabolite exposure is used to further elucidate the mechanism of the DDI.
methodsFor this review, we retrieved records of clinical DDI studies conducted between September 2014 and September 2024 for commonly used CYP probes (midazolam [CYP3A4], flurbiprofen [CYP2C9], omeprazole [CYP2C19], bupropion [CYP2B6], repaglinide [CYP2C8], and dextromethorphan [CYP2D6]). We reviewed these records for reported systemic or urinary metabolite endpoints, concordance of parent and metabolite results, and utilization of metabolite data in clinical recommendations reflected in the label of the investigational medicinal product (IMP).
resultsAlthough DDI studies with probes primarily metabolized by a single pathway (i.e. midazolam, flurbiprofen, omeprazole) often included metabolite endpoints, metabolite data did not add additional sensitivity in detecting the DDI and often were not used in the label recommendations. In contrast, DDI studies with probes that are metabolized by several pathways (i.e. bupropion, repaglinide) demonstrated a higher sensitivity of metabolite-to-parent ratio to detect a DDI compared with use of the parent AUC alone. Urinary phenotyping indexes (as exemplified by dextromethorphan) are rarely collected.
conclusionsBased on these findings, we formulated criteria for deciding on the relevance of metabolite endpoints in clinical DDI studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42234077What 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.