Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42143189›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2026

Multi-objective optimization in population pharmacokinetic model selection and optimization: application of NSGA-II in pyDarwin.

Xinnong Li, Mark Sale, James Craig, Keith Nieforth, Alex Mazur, Robert R Bies

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Xinnong LiDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, 118 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-3002-4146
Mark Sale, Certara, Radnor, PA, 19087, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6239-2359
James Craig, Certara, Radnor, PA, 19087, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1757-9234
Keith Nieforth, Certara, Radnor, PA, 19087, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-2170-4853
Alex Mazur, Certara, Radnor, PA, 19087, USA.
Robert R BiesDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, 118 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA. robertbi@buffalo.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3818-2252

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The selection of a "good" model usually involves a combination of objective and subjective criteria. Although many aspects of model quality can be expressed numerically, certain desirable characteristics remain difficult-or even impossible-to quantify precisely. Multi-objective optimization (MOO) provides a systematic way to handle this challenge by explicitly incorporating and balancing both objective (measurable) and subjective (judgment-based) considerations when choosing among candidate solutions. The generated Pareto front represents a set of non-dominated models where no single solution can be improved in one objective without sacrificing the performance in another objective. Using the non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II), an implementation of MOO, we simultaneously considered objective function value and number of estimated parameters as competing criteria. Concentration measurements of 17-DMAG, quetiapine, clozapine and ziprasidone were applied to build population pharmacokinetic models through traditional stepwise search, machine learning based single-objective hybrid genetic algorithm (SOHGA) and MOO. Local downhill search with MOO was also assessed in this study. While both objectives improved, models with lower objective function value generally contained more estimated parameters. The number of non-dominated solutions for DMAG, ziprasidone, clozapine, and quetiapine was 17, 9, 9, and 13, respectively. The optimal model selected by SOHGA appeared on the Pareto front for DMAG, ziprasidone and clozapine datasets. Overall, MOO provides objective transparency to the cost of tradeoffs between competing model objectives, allowing researchers to better contextualize subjective criteria (e.g., biological plausibility, improvements in diagnostic plots) when aligning model selection with clinical context.

Indexed as

Antipsychotic AgentsModels, BiologicalPharmacokineticsAlgorithmsComputer SimulationGenetic AlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningAntipsychotic AgentsGenetic algorithmMachine learningModelingMulti-objective optimizationPharmacokinetics

Identifiers

PMID42143189
PMCPMC13179877

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.