Cited by 40Pharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismPharmaceutical studies and practicesStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Human radiolabeled mass balance studies supporting the FDA approval of new drugs

Open access

Abstract

Human radiolabeled mass balance studies are an important component of the clinical pharmacology programs supporting the development of new investigational drugs. These studies allow for understanding of the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of the parent drug and metabolite(s) in the human body. Understanding the drug's disposition as well as metabolite profiling and abundance via mass balance studies can help inform the overall drug development program. A survey of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved new drug applications (NDAs) indicated that about 66% of the drugs had relied on findings from the mass balance studies to help understand the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the drug and to inform the overall drug development program. When such studies were not available in the original NDA, adequate justifications were routinely provided. Of the 104 mass balance studies included in this survey, most of the studies were conducted in healthy volunteers (90%) who were mostly men (>86%). The studies had at least six evaluable participants (66%) and were performed using the final route(s) of administration (98%). Eighty-five percent of the studies utilized a dose within the pharmacokinetic linearity range with 54% of the studies using a dose the same as the approved dose. Nearly all studies were performed as a single-dose (97%) study using a fit-for-purpose radiolabeled formulation. In this analysis, we summarized the current practices for conducting mass balance studies and highlighted the importance of conducting appropriately designed human radiolabeled mass balance studies and the challenges associated with inadequately designed or untimely studies.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/cts.13403

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • Mass balance studies typically include around five healthy male volunteers receiving a single dose of the investigational drug.

    “typically including around five healthy male volunteers receiving a single dose of the investigational drug [20].”

    From Pharmacometabolomics Study of Sulfamethoxazole and Trimethoprim in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Real-World Metabolism and Urinary Excretion (2025) · cites this paper as [20]

    The Study Population section says mass balance studies are mostly conducted in healthy male volunteers, and the Investigational Drug Route, Dose, and Formulation section reports that 97% were single-dose studies. The sample-size detail differs: the Study Population section reports a typical sample size of six, with six also the recommended minimum, rather than around five. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 12 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ramamoorthy, A., Bende, G., Chow, E. C. Y., Dimova, H., Hartman, N., Jean, D., Pahwa, S., Ren, Y., Shukla, C., Yang, Y., Doddapaneni, S., & Danielsen, Z. Y.
Affiliations
United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
Corresponding author
  • Doddapaneni, Suresh
  • Danielsen, Zhixia Yan
Venue
Clinical and Translational Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-09-23
Volume
15
Issue
11
Pages
2567-2575
ISSN
  • 1752-8054 (ISSN-L)
  • 1752-8062
OpenAlex
W4294783759
Cited by
40
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
5.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical and Translational Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
drug metabolism, drug disposition, pharmacokinetics, drug metabolites, clinical pharmacology, healthy volunteers, research design, drug development, ADME
MeSH terms
Data Collection, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Female, Humans, Male, Pharmacology, Clinical, United States, United States Food and Drug Administration, Drugs, Investigational, Drug Approval

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