ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Published population pharmacokinetic models of mycophenolate sodium: a systematic review and external evaluation in a Chinese sample of renal transplant recipients.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimizing Mycophenolate Therapy in Renal Transplant Patients Using Machine Learning and Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Background: Immunosuppressive therapy remains the primary method for preventing rejection in renal transplant recipients. While multiple population pharmacokinetic (popPK) models of mycophenolate sodium (MPS) have been developed for this population, their predictive performance across different clinical settings remains unverified. This study systematically evaluated published MPS popPK models through external validation to assess their extrapolation potential. Methods: Published MPS popPK models for renal transplant recipients were identified through systematic searches of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science. These models were externally evaluated using a cohort of renal transplant patients receiving MPS therapy at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University. Model prediction performance was evaluated using three metrics: the goodness-of-fit method based on model prediction, prediction error test method and visual predictive checks method based on model simulation. Results: A total of 186 drug concentration data of 31 patients in our hospital were collected, and 4 literature were retrieved, among which 1 were one-compartment models and 3 were two-compartment models. In the goodness-of-fit diagnosis and prediction error test based on model prediction, the population prediction data of all models were not good, while the individual prediction data showed that the fitting result of Model 1 was relatively better. The visual prediction test results based on model simulation show that the fitting result of Model 1 was relatively good, while the distribution deviation between the observed data and the simulation data of the remaining models was large, and the fitting effect was not good. Conclusion: The published models exhibit significant variability and unsatisfactory predictive performance, indicating that therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) remains an essential requirement for the clinical application of MPS. To advance individualized medication for MPS based on popPK, future research must prioritize the investigation of potential covariates. This will enable identification of key factors influencing MPS model predictability and facilitate the development of a popPK model suitable for patients in our hospital.
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.