Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32686076›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2021

Quantitative Systems Pharmacology Approaches for Immuno-Oncology: Adding Virtual Patients to the Development Paradigm.

Vijayalakshmi Chelliah, Georgia Lazarou, Sumit Bhatnagar, John P Gibbs, Marjoleen Nijsen, Avijit Ray, Brian Stoll, R Adam Thompson, Abhishek Gulati, Serguei Soukharev and 29 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

39 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Vijayalakshmi ChelliahCertara UK Ltd., Sheffield, UK.
Georgia LazarouCertara UK Ltd., Sheffield, UK.
Sumit BhatnagarAbbvie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
John P GibbsAbbvie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Marjoleen NijsenAbbvie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Avijit RayAbbvie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Brian StollAbbvie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
R Adam ThompsonAbbvie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Abhishek GulatiAstellas Pharma Global Development Inc./Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, USA.
Serguei SoukharevAstellas Pharma Global Development Inc./Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, USA.
Akihiro YamadaAstellas Pharma Global Development Inc./Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, USA.
Jared WeddellAstellas Pharma Global Development Inc./Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, USA.
Hiroyuki SayamaAstellas Pharma Global Development Inc./Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, USA.
Masayo OishiAstellas Pharma Global Development Inc./Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, USA.
Sabine Wittemer-RumpBayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany.
Chirag PatelBayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany.
Christoph NiederaltBayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany.
Rolf BurghausBayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany.
Christian ScheeransBayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany.
Jörg LippertBayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany.
Senthil KabilanEMD Serono, Merck KGaA, Billerica, Massachusetts, USA.
Irina KarevaEMD Serono, Merck KGaA, Billerica, Massachusetts, USA.
Natalya BelousovaEMD Serono, Merck KGaA, Billerica, Massachusetts, USA.
Alex RolfeEMD Serono, Merck KGaA, Billerica, Massachusetts, USA.
Anup ZutshiEMD Serono, Merck KGaA, Billerica, Massachusetts, USA.
Marylore ChenelServier, Suresnes, France.
Filippo VeneziaServier, Suresnes, France.
Sylvain FouliardServier, Suresnes, France.
Heike OberwittlerServier, Suresnes, France.
Alix Scholer-DahirelServier, Suresnes, France.
Helene LelievreServier, Suresnes, France.
Dean BottinoMillennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Sabrina C CollinsMillennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Hoa Q NguyenMillennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Haiqing WangMillennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Tomoki YoneyamaMillennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Andy Z X ZhuMillennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Piet H van der GraafCertara UK Ltd., Sheffield, UK.
Andrzej M KierzekCertara UK Ltd., Sheffield, UK.
AbbVie (United States) · USBayer (Germany) · DEServier (France) · FRAstellas Pharma (United States) · USMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) · USMillennium Engineering and Integration (United States) · USTakeda (United States) · USAstellas Pharma (Japan) · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug development in oncology commonly exploits the tools of molecular biology to gain therapeutic benefit through reprograming of cellular responses. In immuno-oncology (IO) the aim is to direct the patient's own immune system to fight cancer. After remarkable successes of antibodies targeting PD1/PD-L1 and CTLA4 receptors in targeted patient populations, the focus of further development has shifted toward combination therapies. However, the current drug-development approach of exploiting a vast number of possible combination targets and dosing regimens has proven to be challenging and is arguably inefficient. In particular, the unprecedented number of clinical trials testing different combinations may no longer be sustainable by the population of available patients. Further development in IO requires a step change in selection and validation of candidate therapies to decrease development attrition rate and limit the number of clinical trials. Quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) proposes to tackle this challenge through mechanistic modeling and simulation. Compounds' pharmacokinetics, target binding, and mechanisms of action as well as existing knowledge on the underlying tumor and immune system biology are described by quantitative, dynamic models aiming to predict clinical results for novel combinations. Here, we review the current QSP approaches, the legacy of mathematical models available to quantitative clinical pharmacologists describing interaction between tumor and immune system, and the recent development of IO QSP platform models. We argue that QSP and virtual patients can be integrated as a new tool in existing IO drug development approaches to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the search for novel combination therapies.

Indexed as

Allergy and ImmunologyDrug DevelopmentMedical OncologyMolecular Dynamics SimulationSystems BiologyAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsComputer SimulationHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsModels, ImmunologicalMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasmsTumor MicroenvironmentImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID32686076
PMCPMC7983940
OpenAlexW3042239416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.