ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
From Population-Based PBPK to Individualized Virtual Twins: Clinical Validation and Applications in Medicine.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Skin physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling: current research progress, software comparison, and future perspectives.Drug delivery · 2026Review
- Pharmacokinetic Variability of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Calcium Channel Blockers: A Comparative Analysis of Exposure Data from Clinical Studies.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Development and Evaluation of a Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model for Cipepofol Across Diverse Clinical Populations.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- LAFOV PET as an enabling platform for pharmacokinetics-informed digital twins.Frontiers in medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models are widely used in the context of personalized medicine, as they allow for the evaluation of dosing schedules and routes of administration by predicting absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME) of drugs in biological systems. Traditionally, PBPK models have been developed and applied at the population level, enabling the characterization of predefined cohorts, which remains limited in supporting true precision dosing. In this review, we explored the increasingly common shift from population-based to individual PBPK modelling, where individuals are modelled as virtual twins (VTs). Through the inclusion of additional patient-specific data, such as demographic, physiological, phenotypic and genotypic information, models can be personalized, moving beyond traditional one-size-fits-all strategies. Overall, incorporating individual patient data (e.g., septic, psychiatric, cardiac, or neonatal populations) improves model performance. Physiological parameters, particularly renal function, show strong potential given their role in drug elimination, while demographic variables enhance predictive accuracy in certain studies. In contrast, the benefits of including cytochrome P450 (CYP) phenotypic and genotypic data remain inconsistent. We further emphasize methodologies used to evaluate model performance, with a focus on clinical validation through comparisons between predicted and observed concentration-time profiles. Key challenges, including limited sample sizes and data availability, that may compromise predictive precision, are also discussed. Finally, we highlight the potential integration of PBPK-based VTs into broader digital twin frameworks as a promising path toward clinical translation, while acknowledging the critical barriers that must be addressed to enable routine clinical implementation.
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.