Trial reportClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2026
Electronic Patient File-Embedded Model-Informed Precision Dosing Compared with Physician Dosing of Tacrolimus in Kidney Transplantation.
Trial report in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2026. 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.
- Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Tacrolimus Initial Dosage Optimization in Membranous Nephropathy Patients.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Protocol-constrained AI enhances tacrolimus dosing accuracy in kidney transplant care.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) of tacrolimus in renal allograft recipients, evaluated in silico, demonstrated improved (time to and) probability of target concentration attainment and smaller deviations from target range. Using simulated tacrolimus concentration-time profiles, a study of 200 patients was predicted to have sufficient power to demonstrate superior performance of MIPD for these exposure end points compared with physician-based dosing. A fully automated tacrolimus MIPD application integrated in the electronic patient file was tested in 293 de novo recipients in the first 14 days after transplantation in a prospective randomized controlled clinical validation study. More patients dosed with the MIPD application reached the primary study end point of three in-target tacrolimus pre-dose trough concentrations by Day 8, compared with physician-dosed patients: 52.2% (95% CI: 45.3-59.6) vs. 35.7% (95% CI: 27.4-45.6); HR: 1.64 (95% CI: 1.10-2.43) (P = 0.015). The mean fraction of samples per patient in target during the complete study period was higher in the MIPD arm: 0.38 ± 0.14 compared with the physician-dosed arm: 0.28 ± 0.14 (P < 0.001). The mean distance from target window was significantly lower in MIPD-treated patients: 0.022 (95% CI: 0.019-0.024) vs. 0.040 (95% CI: 0.036-0.044) (P < 0.001). On 19 occasions (< 1%), MIPD tacrolimus dose suggestions were actively overruled by physicians. A fully automated MIPD application for tacrolimus in de novo renal recipients, integrated in the electronic patient file, demonstrated superior performance in achieving tacrolimus exposure targets with limited active overruling of MIPD dose executions by physicians. Automated MIPD can be tested in larger trials to evaluate the impact of dosing decision support on clinical outcomes after renal transplantation.
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.