Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39921335›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2025

Comparing Scientific Machine Learning With Population Pharmacokinetic and Classical Machine Learning Approaches for Prediction of Drug Concentrations.

Diego Valderrama, Olga Teplytska, Luca Marie Koltermann, Elena Trunz, Eduard Schmulenson, Achim Fritsch, Ulrich Jaehde, Holger Fröhlich

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Diego ValderramaDepartment of Bioinformatics, Fraunhofer Institute for Algorithms and Scientific Computing (SCAI), Sankt Augustin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3450-0359
Olga TeplytskaDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Institute of Pharmacy, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0009-0007-1849-0115
Luca Marie KoltermannDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Institute of Pharmacy, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0009-0002-7555-2048
Elena TrunzInstitute of Computer Science II, Visual Computing, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4037-7369
Eduard SchmulensonDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Institute of Pharmacy, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8026-609X
Achim FritschDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Institute of Pharmacy, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0009-0003-8314-6258
Ulrich JaehdeDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Institute of Pharmacy, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2493-7370
Holger FröhlichDepartment of Bioinformatics, Fraunhofer Institute for Algorithms and Scientific Computing (SCAI), Sankt Augustin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5328-1243

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A variety of classical machine learning (ML) approaches has been developed over the past decade aiming to individualize drug dosages based on measured plasma concentrations. However, the interpretability of these models is challenging as they do not incorporate information on pharmacokinetic (PK) drug disposition. In this work we compare drug plasma concentraton predictions of well-known population PK (PopPK) modeling with classical machine learning models and a newly proposed scientific machine learning (MMPK-SciML) framework. MMPK-SciML allows to estimate PopPK parameters and their inter-individual variability (IIV) using multimodal covariate data of each patient and does not require assumptions about the underlying covariate relationships. A dataset of 541 fluorouracil (5FU) plasma concentrations as example for an intravenously administered drug and a dataset of 302 sunitinib and its active metabolite concentrations each as example for an orally administered drug were used for analysis. Whereas classical ML models were not able to describe the data sufficiently, MMPK-SciML allowed us to obtain accurate drug plasma concentration predictions for test patients. In case of 5FU, goodness-of-fit shows that the MMPK-SciML approach predicts drug plasma concentrations more accurately than PopPK models. For sunitinib, we observed slightly less accurate drug concentration predictions compared to PopPK. Overall, MMPK-SciML has shown promising results and should therefore be further investigated as a valuable alternative to classical PopPK modeling, provided there is sufficient training data.

Indexed as

FluorouracilMachine LearningModels, BiologicalPharmacokineticsSunitinibHumansFluorouracilSunitinibconcentration predictiondrug therapymachine learningoncologypharmacokineticsscientific machine learning

Identifiers

PMID39921335
PMCPMC12001275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.