ArticleJournal of clinical pharmacology2026
Simulation-Based Evaluation of Busulfan Sampling Strategies in Adults and Adolescents Undergoing Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.
Article in Journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Busulfan, used in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, exhibits a narrow therapeutic index and high pharmacokinetic (PK) variability. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is currently employed to achieve target exposure. However, there is no consensus on an optimal limited sampling strategy (LSS) for busulfan on the once-daily (QD) regimen. A virtual cohort of adult patients (n = 1000) receiving OD intravenous busulfan 3.2 mg/kg as a 3-h infusion was generated by Monte Carlo simulation using three published busulfan population PK models. For each one- and two-sample LSS, individual PK parameters were estimated from Day-1 sample(s) by maximum a posteriori Bayesian estimation and used to estimate the 4-day cumulative AUC. A model-informed precision-dosing (MIPD) analysis quantified the target-attainment benefit of TDM per design. The best-performing designs were validated in an external cohort (n = 37) with adults and adolescents. Across all three models, a two-sample early-plus-late schedule was the most informative, and the recommended two-sample design was 3 and 7 h after the start of infusion. TDM guided by a well-chosen LSS approximately doubled cumulative-target attainment, whereas a single early 3-h sample was markedly weaker. In the external cohort, two-sample designs recovered the cumulative 4-day AUC to ∼5%-8% MAPE versus ∼11%-13% for a single 3-h sample. For OD intravenous busulfan in adults and adolescents, a two-sample schedule at 3 and 7 h after the start of infusion supports the correct dosing decision and, through MIPD-guided dose adjustment, approximately doubles target attainment; a single 6-h sample is a simpler but less robust alternative.
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.