Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) are an attractive tool for partial-observation problems in biology, where the governing dynamics are known but some compartments cannot be measured. Chemotherapy pharmacokinetics (PK) is a clean instance: drug concentration in plasma is routinely measured, but concentration in tissue -- which determines tumour kill and off-target toxicity -- is not. We benchmark a PINN against the standard clinical baseline (nonlinear least-squares on the analytical biexponential plasma solution, hereafter NLS) and a physics-agnostic neural baseline (a data-only MLP) on two PK problems. On the linear two-compartment problem, NLS is near-optimal; the PINN matches it to within a small constant factor while also producing the tissue curve in a single training pass, whereas the data-only MLP fails on tissue by roughly 10x. On a Michaelis-Menten extension (saturable elimination), the biexponential closed form no longer exists, so NLS is mis-specified and silently returns meaningless rate constants. The PINN instead exposes a deeper fact: the Michaelis-Menten two-compartment model is non-identifiable from plasma alone, and the PINN reports this honestly by converging to a basin with k12 -> 0. Adding two sparse tissue observations largely resolves identifiability: across five seeds the PINN recovers k21 to within 1% of truth and Vmax, Km to within one standard-deviation bar, while k12 moves in the correct direction (0.02 -> 0.82) but remains ~2 sigma below truth -- a recovery the closed-form NLS estimator cannot attempt at all, because its biexponential ansatz describes only plasma. Our claim is not that PINNs beat NLS. It is that PINNs offer a uniform recipe that ties the textbook estimator on the textbook problem, exposes structural identifiability that the textbook estimator hides, and absorbs heterogeneous measurements within a single loss.