ArticlePharmaceutics2021
External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models and Bayes-Based Dosing of Infliximab.
Article in Pharmaceutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association Between Clozapine Plasma Concentrations and Treatment Response: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis and Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2023Pooled it
- Multi-model averaging improves the performance of model-guided infliximab dosing in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2022Trial
- Article
- Article
- A systematic evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models for polymyxin B in patients with liver and/or kidney dysfunction.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2024Article
- Does Sample Size, Sampling Strategy, or Handling of Concentrations Below the Lower Limit of Quantification Matter When Externally Evaluating Population Pharmacokinetic Models?European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2024Article
- Antibody Drug Clearance: An Underexplored Marker of Outcomes with Checkpoint Inhibitors.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024Review
- Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of cisplatin in small cell lung cancer patients guided with informative priors.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2022Observational
- Ulcerative Colitis and Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis Patients Are Overlooked in Infliximab Population Pharmacokinetic Models: Results from a Comprehensive Review.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Anti-TNF Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Infliximab Efficacy May Be Linked to Full TNF-α Blockade in Peripheral Compartment-A Double Central-Peripheral Target-Mediated Drug Disposition (TMDD) Model.Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the well-demonstrated efficacy of infliximab in inflammatory diseases, treatment failure remains frequent. Dose adjustment using Bayesian methods has shown in silico its interest in achieving target plasma concentrations. However, most of the published models have not been fully validated in accordance with the recommendations. This study aimed to submit these models to an external evaluation and verify their predictive capabilities. Eight models were selected for external evaluation, carried out on an independent database (409 concentrations from 157 patients). Each model was evaluated based on the following parameters: goodness-of-fit (comparison of predictions to observations), residual error model (population weighted residuals (PWRES), individual weighted residuals (IWRES), and normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE)), and predictive performances (prediction-corrected visual predictive checks (pcVPC) and Bayesian simulations). The performances observed during this external evaluation varied greatly from one model to another. The eight evaluated models showed a significant bias in population predictions (from -7.19 to 7.38 mg/L). Individual predictions showed acceptable bias and precision for six of the eight models (mean error of -0.74 to -0.29 mg/L and mean percent error of -16.6 to -0.4%). Analysis of NPDE and pcVPC confirmed these results and revealed a problem with the inclusion of several covariates (weight, concomitant immunomodulatory treatment, presence of anti-drug antibodies). This external evaluation showed satisfactory results for some models, notably models A and B, and highlighted several prospects for improving the pharmacokinetic models of infliximab for clinical-biological application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.