ArticleThe AAPS journal2026
Raltegravir Plasma Exposure: A Machine Learning-Based Model for its Prediction Using Limited Sampling Strategy.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2026. 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.
- Exposure prediction and dose optimization of polymyxin B based on bayesian and machine learning.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent studies have applied machine learning (ML)-based limited sampling strategies (LSS) to predict drug exposure (AUC), achieving low prediction error and performance comparable to or better than multiple linear regression and population pharmacokinetics LSS. This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning-based limited sampling strategy capable of predicting raltegravir (RAL) exposure. Four machine learning algorithms (XGBoost, Random Forest, GLMNet, and SVM) were trained using pharmacokinetic profiles generated via Monte Carlo simulation from a population pharmacokinetic (POPPK) model. Data were divided into training (75%) and test (25%) sets. All possible combinations of sampling times, pairs and triplets, in steady-state, up to 12 h post-dose were evaluated. Model performance was assessed by the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) in the cross-validation, and the best performing model was evaluated in the test set and externally validated using simulated PK profiles from an independent POPPK model and patient data from a clinical study. XGBoost trained with concentrations at 0.5, 2, and 4 h showed the best predictive performance. The model achieved excellent accuracy in the test set (bias/RMSE: 0.8%/8.7%) and in the independent simulation (1.9%/14.3%). Performance decreased in real patient data (5.0%/24.1%), highlighting the need for caution when extrapolating predictions to populations whose characteristics differ from those represented in the training datasets. A machine learning model using only three sampling timepoints has been developed and validated in different datasets, enabling accurate estimation of RAL AUC₀-₁₂. This approach provides a tool for pharmacokinetic and PK/PD studies and reduces intensive sampling need in clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42091773What 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.