Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34399036›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2022

Step-by-step comparison of ordinary differential equation and agent-based approaches to pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models.

Van Thuy Truong, Paul G Baverel, Grant D Lythe, Paolo Vicini, James W T Yates, Vincent F S Dubois

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

6 authors.

Van Thuy TruongClinical Pharmacology and Quantitative Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Paul G BaverelClinical Pharmacology and Quantitative Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Grant D LytheDepartment of Applied Mathematics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Paolo ViciniClinical Pharmacology and Quantitative Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
James W T YatesDMPK, Early Oncology, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Vincent F S DuboisClinical Pharmacology and Quantitative Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 program H2020-MSCA-ITN 764698
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mathematical models in oncology aid in the design of drugs and understanding of their mechanisms of action by simulation of drug biodistribution, drug effects, and interaction between tumor and healthy cells. The traditional approach in pharmacometrics is to develop and validate ordinary differential equation models to quantify trends at the population level. In this approach, time-course of biological measurements is modeled continuously, assuming a homogenous population. Another approach, agent-based models, focuses on the behavior and fate of biological entities at the individual level, which subsequently could be summarized to reflect the population level. Heterogeneous cell populations and discrete events are simulated, and spatial distribution can be incorporated. In this tutorial, an agent-based model is presented and compared to an ordinary differential equation model for a tumor efficacy model inhibiting the pERK pathway. We highlight strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities of each approach.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalNeoplasmsComputer SimulationHumansModels, BiologicalTissue Distribution

Identifiers

PMID34399036
PMCPMC8846629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.