ArticleImmunotherapy advances2022
De-risking clinical trial failure through mechanistic simulation.
Article in Immunotherapy advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence of focusing the MHC class I immunopeptidome by tapasin.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- A Mathematical Modelling Study of Chemotactic Dynamics in Cell Cultures: The Impact of Spatio-temporal Heterogeneity.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Drug development typically comprises a combination of pre-clinical experimentation, clinical trials, and statistical data-driven analyses. Therapeutic failure in late-stage clinical development costs the pharmaceutical industry billions of USD per year. Clinical trial simulation represents a key derisking strategy and combining them with mechanistic models allows one to test hypotheses for mechanisms of failure and to improve trial designs. This is illustrated with a T-cell activation model, used to simulate the clinical trials of IMA901, a short-peptide cancer vaccine. Simulation results were consistent with observed outcomes and predicted that responses are limited by peptide off-rates, peptide competition for dendritic cell (DC) binding, and DC migration times. These insights were used to hypothesise alternate trial designs predicted to improve efficacy outcomes. This framework illustrates how mechanistic models can complement clinical, experimental, and data-driven studies to understand, test, and improve trial designs, and how results may differ between humans and mice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.