ArticlePharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2023
External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetics Models of Lithium in the Bipolar Population.
Article in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of pharmacokinetic model for quizartinib quantified by UPLC-MS/MS in patients with FLT3-ITD negative newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Trial
- Article
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
Lithium has been used in the treatment of bipolar disorder for several decades. Treatment optimization is recommended for this drug, due to its narrow therapeutic range and a large pharmacokinetics (PK) variability. In addition to therapeutic drug monitoring, attempts have been made to predict individual lithium doses using population pharmacokinetics (popPK) models. This study aims to assess the clinical applicability of published lithium popPK models by testing their predictive performance on two different external datasets. Available PopPK models were identified and their predictive performance was determined using a clinical dataset (46 patients/samples) and the literature dataset (89 patients/samples). The median prediction error (PE) and median absolute PE were used to assess bias and inaccuracy. The potential factors influencing model predictability were also investigated, and the results of both external evaluations compared. Only one model met the acceptability criteria for both datasets. Overall, there was a lack of predictability of models; median PE and median absolute PE, respectively, ranged from -6.6% to 111.2% and from 24.4% to 111.2% for the literature dataset, and from -4.5% to 137.6% and from 24.9% to 137.6% for the clinical dataset. Most models underpredicted the observed concentrations (7 out of 10 models presented a negative bias). Renal status was included as a covariate of lithium's clearance in only two models. To conclude, most of lithium's PopPK models had limited predictive performances related to the absence of covariates of interest included, such as renal status. A solution to this problem could be to improve the models with methodologies such as metamodeling. This could be useful in the perspective of model-informed precision dosing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.