ReviewJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2026
Bridging the operational gap in population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis: an international perspective on the 2025 Chinese group standard.
Review in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PPK/PD) modeling is a key component of model-informed drug development and model-informed precision dosing. Regulatory agencies in the United States, Europe, Japan, and China, together with the recently adopted ICH M15 guideline, have established high-level principles for the conduct, evaluation, and reporting of population modeling analyses. However, many practical implementation details are intentionally left to sponsors, investigators, and analysts. Although this flexibility accommodates diverse objectives, data structures, therapeutic areas, and decision contexts, it may also contribute to inter-analyst variability and limit the reproducibility, transparency, and consistency of PPK/PD practice. This review discusses the 2025 Chinese Pharmacological Society group standard for PPK/PD analysis from an international and implementation-oriented perspective. The standard describes a stepwise analytical lifecycle comprising pre-analysis preparation, base model development, final model establishment, model application, and reporting, with model evaluation embedded iteratively throughout the process. It also formalizes operational elements often implicit or under-specified in existing guidance, including a prospective Population Modeling Analysis Plan, distinction between exploratory and confirmatory analyses, prioritization of decision-relevant parameters, staged verification checkpoints, a five-element risk-management cycle, and ethical considerations related to data governance and equitable model application. We position the Chinese group standard as an analyst-level operational reference that complements, rather than replaces or duplicates, the decision-level assessment framework provided by ICH M15. Although developed within the Chinese regulatory and professional context, the structured workflow described in the standard may provide a practical reference for organizations seeking to improve the reproducibility, transparency, and consistency of PPK/PD analyses internationally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42406159What 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.