Back

Exploring Ensemble Selection for Model Averaging in Model-informed Precision Dosing: A Tacrolimus Case Study Extended to Cefepime and InfliximabExploring Ensemble Selection for Model Averaging in Model-informed Precision Dosing: A Tacrolimus Case Study Extended to Cefepime and Infliximab

Baroudi, S.; Franck, B.; Woillard, J.-B.; Destere, A.; Comets, E.; LEMAITRE, F.

2026-10-02 pharmacology and therapeutics
10.64898/2026.09.24.26363867 medRxiv
Show abstract

Model averaging combines the predictions of several population pharmacokinetic models to support model-informed precision dosing, but how to select ensemble models remains unexplored. Using tacrolimus as a case study, we first evaluated all possible ensembles of 27 models in 37 kidney and liver transplant recipients with full pharmacokinetic profiles at occasions 1 and 5 and trough concentrations at occasions 2, 3 and 4. Models were weighted by individual objective function value. Predictive performance for the occasion 5 area under the curve was assessed with individual parameters estimated from the occasion 5 trough concentration or from occasion 1 to 4 observations. Then, seven ensembles, selected a priori from relevance and external evaluation scores or as the best-performing ensembles previously identified, were compared across ten sets of observations, from a single trough concentration to dense sampling. Mean imprecision per ensemble size reached a plateau beyond 3-4 models. The best ensembles depended on the set of observations, comprising three models with the occasion 5 trough concentration and seven or eight models with occasions 1 to 4 observations. Across all sets, the ensemble optimised on the occasion 5 trough concentration was among the most precise, and score-based ensembles remained consistently precise, whereas the ensemble optimised on occasions 1 to 4 generalised poorly. Only a limited sampling strategy at occasion 5 kept imprecision below 20% for all ensembles. The plateau effect generalised to infliximab and cefepime. Ensemble composition matters more than ensemble size. Model averaging should rely on well-chosen ensembles rather than all available models.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.