Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41848023›Full record

ArticleAnalytical chemistry2026

Graph Machine Learning Can Estimate Drug Concentrations in Whole Blood from Forensic Screening Results.

Tetiana Lutchyn, Marie Mardal, Michael Nedahl, Benjamin Ricaud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical chemistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tetiana LutchynDepartment of Physics and Technology, The Arctic University of Norway, 9019 Tromsø, Norway.
Marie MardalDepartment of Pharmacy, The Arctic University of Norway, 9019 Tromsø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-3203-7305
Michael NedahlDepartment of Forensic Medicine, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Benjamin RicaudDepartment of Physics and Technology, The Arctic University of Norway, 9019 Tromsø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7611-4448

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

LC-HRMS is widely used in forensic toxicology for broad-scope screening. When a newly emerging or rarely encountered compound is tentatively identified, toxicologists must decide whether it may be relevant to a case and, if so, quantify it. However, acquiring reference material for quantification is costly and time-consuming. A rapid semiquantitative estimation method would help prioritize only compounds above the toxic threshold. This study presents a machine-learning (ML) framework that estimates drug concentrations in whole blood using molecular structure information and LC-HRMS signals. Using a data set of 191 drugs spiked into whole blood at multiple concentration levels, we trained and evaluated several ML models. Standard models, including Random Forests, achieved moderate performance. In contrast, a recently reported Graph Neural Network (GNN) leveraging atomic features and global molecular properties consistently produced the highest accuracy. Under cross-validation, the GNN predicted signal-to-concentration ratios for 79% of all molecules, corresponding to concentration estimates between 50% and 200% of the true value. Toxicological thresholds often span multiple orders of magnitude, making this precision acceptable. The GNN model was additionally evaluated on an external benchmark data set of ionization efficiencies (

Indexed as

Forensic ToxicologyMachine LearningGraph Neural NetworksHumansLiquid Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryPharmaceutical PreparationsRandom ForestPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID41848023
PMCPMC13044884

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.