ArticleClinical pharmacokinetics2026
From Clinical Trials to Real-World Patients: Population Pharmacokinetics and Precision Dosing Simulations of Lorlatinib.
Article in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveThe pharmacokinetics of lorlatinib have been characterized in a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model by the license holder, but external validation with real-world data is lacking. As higher trough concentrations are linked to increased toxicity, there may be a role for model-informed precision dosing (MIPD).
methodsThe published lorlatinib population PK model was externally validated using data from 150 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated in France and the Netherlands. Model performance was assessed using mean percentage error (MPE) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). Suboptimal validation results led to development of a refined population PK model, which was subsequently used to simulate lorlatinib exposure across different doses. A MIPD strategy targeting trough concentrations of 75-125 ng/mL was assessed.
resultsExternal validation revealed significant bias (MPE: -6.1%, 95% CI -11.1 to -0.5%), with the original population PK model systematically underestimating trough concentrations. The refined model included a lower clearance (13.7 versus 14.5 L/h). Simulations with the refined model predicted a median steady state trough level of 127.0 ng/mL (IQR: 96.1-162.0 ng/mL) versus 106.0 ng/mL with the original model for standard 100 mg once-daily (QD) regimen. MIPD increased the proportion of patients within target range from 35 to 62% after one cycle of dose adjustment.
conclusionsThe published population PK model underestimates real-world trough concentrations, underscoring the importance of external validation of clinical trial-derived models. The refined model reflects lorlatinib pharmacokinetics in clinical practice better. Simulations suggest that lower lorlatinib doses may be feasible and MIPD may reduce toxicity.
Identifiers
42701921What 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.