Cited by 96Computational Drug Discovery MethodsDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism

Tumor Drug Penetration Measurements Could Be the Neglected Piece of the Personalized Cancer Treatment Puzzle

Open access
Bartelink, Imke H., Jones, Ella F., Shahidi‐Latham, Sheerin K., Lee, Pei Rong Evelyn, Zheng, Yanan, Vicini, Paolo, van ‘t Veer, Laura, Wolf, Denise +7 more·2019·Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Precision medicine aims to use patient genomic, epigenomic, specific drug dose, and other data to define disease patterns that may potentially lead to an improved treatment outcome. Personalized dosing regimens based on tumor drug penetration can play a critical role in this approach. State-of-the-art techniques to measure tumor drug penetration focus on systemic exposure, tissue penetration, cellular or molecular engagement, and expression of pharmacological activity. Using in silico methods, this information can be integrated to bridge the gap between the therapeutic regimen and the pharmacological link with clinical outcome. These methodologies are described, and challenges ahead are discussed. Supported by many examples, this review shows how the combination of these techniques provides enhanced patient-specific information on drug accessibility at the tumor tissue level, target binding, and downstream pharmacology. Our vision of how to apply tumor drug penetration measurements offers a roadmap for the clinical implementation of precision dosing.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cpt.1211

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Multiple physiological barriers of the tumor microenvironment-dense extracellular matrix, cellular heterogeneity, hypoxic gradients, and elevated interstitial fluid pressure-hinder uniform distribution and accumulation of therapeutics, reducing treatment efficacy.

    “Drug delivery to solid tumors is challenged by multiple physiological barriers arising from the tumor microenvironment, including dense extracellular matrix, cellular heterogeneity, hypoxic gradients, and elevated interstitial fluid pressure. These features hinder the uniform distribution and accumulation of therapeutics, reducing treatment efficacy.”

    From Modeling Tumor Microenvironment Complexity In Vitro: Spheroids as Physiologically Relevant Tumor Models and Strategies for Their Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [3]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Many anticancer agents fail to achieve sufficient intratumoral concentrations or exhibit poor distribution within tumor tissues, resulting in incomplete eradication of malignant cells and development of therapeutic resistance.

    “Many anticancer agents fail to achieve sufficient intratumoral concentrations or exhibit poor distribution within tumor tissues, resulting in incomplete eradication of malignant cells and the development of therapeutic resistance [3].”

    From Modeling Tumor Microenvironment Complexity In Vitro: Spheroids as Physiologically Relevant Tumor Models and Strategies for Their Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [3]

    The 'Precision dosing as a missing piece' section says tumor drug penetration is often heterogeneous, leaving some neoplastic cells without the required dose, and that variable penetration may cause suboptimal responses. The 'Studying target binding at a cellular/molecular level' section links limited intracellular drug accumulation to multidrug resistance, but does not establish that poor distribution throughout tumor tissue generally causes the development of therapeutic resistance. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The tumor microenvironment significantly influences drug penetration, retention, and therapeutic response.

    “Together, these components create a tumor microenvironment (TME) that significantly influences drug penetration, retention, and therapeutic response [1,3,4].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bartelink, I. H., Jones, E. F., Shahidi‐Latham, S. K., Lee, P. R. E., Zheng, Y., Vicini, P., van ‘t Veer, L., Wolf, D., Iagaru, A., Kroetz, D. L., Prideaux, B., Cilliers, C., Thurber, G. M., Wimana, Z., & Gebhart, G.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Drug Metabolism & Pharmacokinetics Genentech South San Francisco California USA
  • Clinical Pharmacology, Pharmacometrics and DMPK (CPD) MedImmune South San Francisco California USA
  • Clinical Pharmacology, Pharmacometrics and DMPK (CPD) MedImmune Cambridge UK
  • Department of Laboratory Medicine of the UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center University of California, San Francisco San Francisco California USA
  • Stanford Health Care (US)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Institut Jules Bordet Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) Brussels Belgium
Corresponding author
Bartelink, Imke H.
Venue
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-10-06
Volume
106
Issue
1
Pages
148-163
ISSN
  • 0009-9236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-6535
OpenAlex
W2887856815
Cited by
96
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Drug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Keywords
precision dosing, precision oncology, precision medicine, pharmacokinetics, tissue penetration, target binding, in silico modeling, pharmacological activity, individualized dosing
MeSH terms
Antineoplastic Agents, Clinical Trials as Topic, Computer Simulation, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Models, Biological, Neoplasms, Molecular Imaging, Precision Medicine, Absorption, Physiological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review