Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28733187›Full record

ArticleJournal of theoretical biology2017

A confidence building exercise in data and identifiability: Modeling cancer chemotherapy as a case study.

Marisa C Eisenberg, Harsh V Jain

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of theoretical biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Benchmarking tools for a priori identifiability analysis.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Marisa C EisenbergEpidemiology and Mathematics, University of Michigan, United States. Electronic address: marisae@umich.edu.
Harsh V JainMathematics, Florida State University, United States. Electronic address: hjain@fsu.edu.

Funding

Mechanistic Modeling of Oropharyngeal Cancer Treatment and Recurrence (Supplement)U01CA182915 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI EISENBERG, MARISA C, MEZA, RAFAEL · 2014 to 2019
$3.3M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA182915
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mathematical modeling has a long history in the field of cancer therapeutics, and there is increasing recognition that it can help uncover the mechanisms that underlie tumor response to treatment. However, making quantitative predictions with such models often requires parameter estimation from data, raising questions of parameter identifiability and estimability. Even in the case of structural (theoretical) identifiability, imperfect data and the resulting practical unidentifiability of model parameters can make it difficult to infer the desired information, and in some cases, to yield biologically correct inferences and predictions. Here, we examine parameter identifiability and estimability using a case study of two compartmental, ordinary differential equation models of cancer treatment with drugs that are cell cycle-specific (taxol) as well as non-specific (oxaliplatin). We proceed through model building, structural identifiability analysis, parameter estimation, practical identifiability analysis and its biological implications, as well as alternative data collection protocols and experimental designs that render the model identifiable. We use the differential algebra/input-output relationship approach for structural identifiability, and primarily the profile likelihood approach for practical identifiability. Despite the models being structurally identifiable, we show that without consideration of practical identifiability, incorrect cell cycle distributions can be inferred, that would result in suboptimal therapeutic choices. We illustrate the usefulness of estimating practically identifiable combinations (in addition to the more typically considered structurally identifiable combinations) in generating biologically meaningful insights. We also use simulated data to evaluate how the practical identifiability of the model would change under alternative experimental designs. These results highlight the importance of understanding the underlying mechanisms rather than purely using parsimony or information criteria/goodness-of-fit to decide model selection questions. The overall roadmap for identifiability testing laid out here can be used to help provide mechanistic insight into complex biological phenomena, reduce experimental costs, and optimize model-driven experimentation.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAlgorithmsAntineoplastic AgentsCell CycleDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansNeoplasmsOrganoplatinum CompoundsOxaliplatinPaclitaxelAntineoplastic AgentsOrganoplatinum CompoundsOxaliplatinPaclitaxelCancerChemotherapy modelCompartmental modelsIdentifiabilityParameter estimation

Identifiers

PMID28733187
PMCPMC6007023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.