ArticlePloS one2026
Pharmacokinetic model selection for infliximab based on inflammatory bowel disease phenotype and severity: Toward model-informed precision dosing.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) differ in intestinal location and depth of involvement. Patients with UC who have or experienced a flare-up according to Truelove-Witts criteria (ACUS), as well as those with fistulizing Crohn's disease (FIST), may represent difficult-to-treat populations. This study investigates the phenotype- and severity-driven selection of infliximab (IFX) population pharmacokinetic models to optimize predictive performance and support precision dosing in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care. A retrospective analysis was conducted at University Hospital Medical Centre "Zvezdara". Twenty published IFX models were evaluated across five datasets (overall, ASUC, CD, FIST, UC), primarily using trough concentrations obtained via routine therapeutic drug monitoring. Predictive accuracy was assessed using median prediction error (MDPE) and median absolute prediction error (MAPE). Bayesian forecasts were evaluated using median individual prediction error (MDIPE) and its absolute value (MAIPE). Normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE) and visual predictive check (VPC) were used for simulation-based diagnostics. Moreover, probability of probability of target-attainment (PTA%) per model and subgroup was calculated. No model met all predefined prediction-based performance criteria. In a priori analysis, the Matsuoka model showed the satisfactory overall performance, while the Xu model was most suitable for CD patients. In a posteriori analysis, the Ternant 2008 model had the well overall accuracy, with other models (Dreesen 2021 for ASUC, Matsuoka for CD, Brandse 2016 for UC) performing satisfactory in respective subgroups. Simulation NPDE diagnostics identified the Aubourg model as suitable for the overall dataset, while VPC results mainly supported the a priori analysis conclusions. These findings highlight the relevance of disease phenotype and severity in selecting IFX pharmacokinetic models. Rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach, tailoring model choice to patient subgroups enhances predictive performance. This supports a more individualized, model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) strategy for optimizing IFX dosing in IBD.
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.