Erratum: ASCPT task force for advancing pharmacometrics and integration into drug development (Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (2010) 88 (158-161) DOI: 10.1038/clpt.2010.141);ASCPT task force for advancing pharmacometrics and integration into drug development

Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics

Volumn 88, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 158-161

  Goldberger, M J ^a   Singh, N ^b   Allerheiligan, S ^c   Gobburu, J V S ^d   Lalonde, R ^e   Smith, B ^f   Ryder, S ^g   Yozviak, A ^b  

^a ABBOTT LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b MCKINSEY AND COMPANY   (United States)

^c ELI LILLY AND COMPANY   (United States)

^d CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

^e PFIZER GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

^f AMGEN INC   (United States)

^g Astellas Pharma Global Development   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOSTATISTICS; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY; DRUG INDUSTRY; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MEDICAL EXPERT; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PHARMACOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; PHARMACOMETRIC; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCIENTIST; SHORT SURVEY; VALIDITY;

EID: 77954868608     PISSN: 00099236     EISSN: 15326535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/clpt.2010.203     Document Type: Erratum

References (15)

1. Elias, T., Gordian, M., Singh, N. & Zemmel, R. Why Products Fail in Phase III. IN VIVO, published online April 2006.
2. Adams, C.P. & Branter, V.V. Estimating the cost of new drug development: is it really 802 million dollars? Health Affairs 25, 420-428 (2006).
3. Bhattaram, V.A. et al. Impact of pharmacometrics on drug approval and labeling decisions: a survey of 42 new drug applications. AAPS J. 7, E503-E512 (2005).
4. Bhattaram, V.A. et al. Impact of pharmacometric reviews on new drug approval and labeling decisions\a survey of 31 new drug applications submitted between 2005 and 2006. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 81, 213-221 (2007).
5. Lalonde, R.L. et al. Model-based drug development. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 82, 21-32 (2007).
6. Zhang, L. et al. Model-based drug development: the road to quantitative pharmacology. J. Pharmacokinet. Pharmacodyn. 33, 369-393 (2006).
7. Wang, Y. et al. Leveraging prior quantitative knowledge to guide drug development decisions and regulatory science recommendations: impact of FDA pharmacometrics during 2004-2006. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 48, 146-156 (2008).
8. Olson, S.C. et al. Impact of population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analyses on the drug development process: experience at Parke-Davis. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 38, 449-459 (2000).
9. Reigner, B.G., Williams, P.E., Patel, I.H., Steimer, J.L., Peck, C. & van Brummelen, P. An evaluation of the integration of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles in clinical drug development. Experience within Hoffmann La Roche. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 33, 142-152 (1997).
10. US Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Guidance for Industry: Population Pharmacokinetics (February 1999).
11. US Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Guidance for Industry: Exposure-Response Relationships\Study Design, Data Analysis, and Regulatory Applications (April 2003).
12. US Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Guidance for Industry: End-of-Phase 2A Meetings (September 2009).
13. US Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Guidance for Industry: Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products (May 1998).
14. US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Dose-Response Information to Support Drug Registration (November 1994).
15. Lesko, L.J. Paving the critical path: how can clinical pharmacology help achieve the vision? Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 81, 170-177 (2007).