Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34102034›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2021

Scientific and regulatory evaluation of mechanistic in silico drug and disease models in drug development: Building model credibility.

Flora T Musuamba, Ine Skottheim Rusten, Raphaëlle Lesage, Giulia Russo, Roberta Bursi, Luca Emili, Gaby Wangorsch, Efthymios Manolis, Kristin E Karlsson, Alexander Kulesza and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. In Silico Clinical Trials in Drug Development: A Systematic Review.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Best Practices in Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Modeling.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

20 authors.

Flora T MusuambaEMA Modelling and Simulation Working Party, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8276-8870
Ine Skottheim RustenEMA Modelling and Simulation Working Party, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0339-4968
Raphaëlle LesageBiomechanics Section, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Giulia RussoDepartment of Drug and Health Sciences, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Roberta BursiInSilicoTrials Technologies, Milano, Italy.
Luca EmiliInSilicoTrials Technologies, Milano, Italy.
Gaby WangorschEMA Modelling and Simulation Working Party, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Efthymios ManolisEMA Modelling and Simulation Working Party, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kristin E KarlssonEMA Modelling and Simulation Working Party, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4780-1166
Alexander KuleszaNovadiscovery, Lyon, France.
Eulalie CourcellesNovadiscovery, Lyon, France.
Jean-Pierre BoisselNovadiscovery, Lyon, France.
Cécile F RousseauVoisin Consulting Life Sciences, Boulogne (Paris), France.
Emmanuelle M VoisinVoisin Consulting Life Sciences, Boulogne (Paris), France.ORCID 0000-0001-7808-5268
Rossana AlessandrelloAQuAS - Agency for Health Quality and Assessment of Catalonia, Catalonia, Spain.
Nuno CuradoExploristics, Belfast, UK.
Enrico Dall'araInsigneo Institute, Sheffield University, Sheffield, UK.
Blanca RodriguezDepartment of Computer Science, British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6361-3339
Francesco PappalardoDepartment of Drug and Health Sciences, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1668-3320
Liesbet GerisBiomechanics Section, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

Basic Biomedical Sciences 214290/Z/18/ZERC CoG 772418European Union's Horizon 2020 research 101016496European Union's Horizon 2020 research 101016503European Union's Horizon 2020 research 101017578European Union's Horizon 2020 research 777123European Union's Horizon 2020 research 825843NC3Rs Infrastructure for Impact Award NC/P001076/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust Fellowship in 214290/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The value of in silico methods in drug development and evaluation has been demonstrated repeatedly and convincingly. While their benefits are now unanimously recognized, international standards for their evaluation, accepted by all stakeholders involved, are still to be established. In this white paper, we propose a risk-informed evaluation framework for mechanistic model credibility evaluation. To properly frame the proposed verification and validation activities, concepts such as context of use, regulatory impact and risk-based analysis are discussed. To ensure common understanding between all stakeholders, an overview is provided of relevant in silico terminology used throughout this paper. To illustrate the feasibility of the proposed approach, we have applied it to three real case examples in the context of drug development, using a credibility matrix currently being tested as a quick-start tool by regulators. Altogether, this white paper provides a practical approach to model evaluation, applicable in both scientific and regulatory evaluation contexts.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, TheoreticalDrug DevelopmentHumansRisk AssessmentTerminology as Topic

Identifiers

PMID34102034
PMCPMC8376137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.