Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35119624›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacokinetics2022

"De-Shrinking" EBEs: The Solution for Bayesian Therapeutic Drug Monitoring.

Sarah Baklouti, Peggy Gandia, Didier Concordet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Uncertainty undermines the validity of antimicrobial pharmacodynamics.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sarah BakloutiINTHERES, UMR 1436, INRAE, ENVT, Université de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, 23 chemin des Capelles, B.P. 87617, 31076, Toulouse Cedex 3, France.
Peggy GandiaINTHERES, UMR 1436, INRAE, ENVT, Université de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, 23 chemin des Capelles, B.P. 87617, 31076, Toulouse Cedex 3, France.
Didier ConcordetINTHERES, UMR 1436, INRAE, ENVT, Université de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, 23 chemin des Capelles, B.P. 87617, 31076, Toulouse Cedex 3, France. didier.concordet@envt.fr.ORCID 0000-0003-3916-577X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTherapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) aims at individualising a dosage regimen and is increasingly being performed by estimating individual pharmacokinetic parameters via empirical Bayes estimates (EBEs). However, EBEs suffer from shrinkage that makes them biased. This bias is a weakness for TDM and probably a barrier to the acceptance of drug dosage adjustments by prescribers.

objectiveThe aim of this article is to propose a methodology that allows a correction of EBE shrinkage and an improvement in their precision.

methodsAs EBEs are defined, they can be seen as a special case of ridge estimators depending on a parameter usually denoted λ. After a bias correction depending on λ, we chose λ so that the individual pharmacokinetic estimations have minimal imprecision. Our estimate is by construction always better than EBE with respect to bias (i.e. shrinkage) and precision.

resultsWe illustrate the performance of this approach with two different drugs: iohexol and isavuconazole. Depending on the patient's actual pharmacokinetic parameter values, the improvement given by our approach ranged from 0 to 100%.

conclusionThis innovative methodology is promising since, to the best of our knowledge, no other individual shrinkage correction has been proposed.

Indexed as

Drug MonitoringIohexolBayes TheoremHumansIohexol

Identifiers

PMID35119624
PMCPMC9095561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.