Cited by 55Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsPharmaceutical studies and practicesPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism

The Use of Biomarkers in Human Pharmacology (Phase I) Studies

Open access
Cohen, A.F., Burggraaf, J., van Gerven, J.M.A., Moerland, M., Groeneveld, G.J.·2015·Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology

Abstract

The development of a new medicine is a risky and costly undertaking that requires careful planning. This planning is largely applied to the operational aspects of the development and less so to the scientific objectives and methodology. The drugs that will be developed in the future will increasingly affect pathophysiological pathways that have been largely unexplored. Such drug prototypes cannot be immediately introduced in large clinical trials. The effects of the drug on normal physiology, pathophysiology, and eventually the desired clinical effects will need to be evaluated in a structured approach, based on the definition of drug development as providing answers to important questions by appropriate clinical studies. This review describes the selection process for biomarkers that are fit-for-purpose for the stage of drug development in which they are used. This structured and practical approach is widely applicable and particularly useful for the early stages of innovative drug development.

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 · 10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-011613-135918

Cites

74 of 74 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?

  • The FDA Guidance on Maximum Starting Dose from 2005 recommends that the maximum starting dose in humans should primarily be calculated on the basis of safety levels (NOAEL).

    “The FDA Guidance on Maximum Starting Dose from 2005 [23] recommends that the maximum starting dose in humans should primarily be calculated on the basis of safety levels (NOAEL).”

    From Commentary on the <scp>EMA Guideline</scp> on strategies to identify and mitigate risks for first‐in‐human and early clinical trials with investigational medicinal products (2018) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Phase I Studies and Beyond section discusses a 1998 FDA/EMA guideline on how to organize clinical studies, not the 2005 FDA guidance on maximum starting doses. Searches for NOAEL and starting-dose calculations found no passage in our copy stating that the 2005 guidance recommends calculating the human starting dose primarily from NOAEL safety levels. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Yusuf S, Flather M, Gent M. 1997. Effects of RheothRx on mortality, morbidity, left ventricular function, and infarct size in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 96(1):192-201
  2. Lalonde RL, Kowalski KG, Hutmacher MM, Ewy W, Nichols DJ, et al. 2007. Model-based drug devel- opment. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 82(1):21-32
  3. D'Souza F. 2002. Putting real options to work to improve project planning. Harvard Manag. Update 7(8):3-6

Authors
Cohen, A. F., Burggraaf, J., van Gerven, J. M. A., Moerland, M., & Groeneveld, G. J.
Affiliations
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Centre for Human Drug Research, 2333 CL Leiden, The Netherlands;
  • Centre for Human Drug Research (NL)
Venue
Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology
Published
2015-01-06
Volume
55
Issue
1
Pages
55-74
ISSN
  • 0362-1642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4304
OpenAlex
W2119617861
Cited by
55
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Keywords
biomarkers, human pharmacology, drug development, biomarker selection, early drug development, drug safety assessment
MeSH terms
Animals, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacology, Risk Factors, Signal Transduction, Risk Assessment, Endpoint Determination, Biomarkers, Pharmacological, Drug Dosage Calculations, Drug Discovery, Patient Safety, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

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