Population Pharmacokinetics Analysis of Infliximab in up to 10-Year-Old Patients with Paediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Label-Recommended Dose Fails to Achieve Therapeutic Target Concentration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Younger patients with paediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may require higher infliximab (IFX) doses to attain similar target trough levels compared with older paediatric and adult patients with IBD. This study aimed to investigate the population pharmacokinetics (popPK) of infliximab (IFX) in young paediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (≤ 10 years old), optimize the IFX dosage in this special population and explore whether different IFX assays were comparable. METHODS: IFX therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) data from young paediatric patients with IBD (≤ 10 years old) were retrospectively collected from 14 European and Canadian centres (2015-2019). External validation of published popPK models was performed by calculating relative mean predictive errors (rMPE) and relative root mean square errors (rRMSE) to assess bias and imprecision. A refined popPK model was then developed using nonlinear mixed-effects modelling in NONMEM version 7.4. PopPK parameters in young paediatric patients with IBD (≤ 10 years old) were compared with those in published paediatric patients (> 10 to < 17 years) and adults. RESULTS: ) remained similar (P > 0.05). With label-recommended dosing, IFX concentrations dropped below 5 mg/L for approximately 4 weeks during maintenance. CONCLUSIONS: Paediatric patients ≤ 10 years, demonstrated a higher IFX CL than paediatric patients > 10 to < 17 years and adults, with albumin and CRP explaining the variability of CL. The differences obtained across the IFX assays did not affect overall drug exposure. To maintain trough concentrations above 5 mg/L in paediatric patients ≤ 10 years, a dosing interval of 4 weeks is required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".