Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37300376›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2023

Model-based prediction of progression-free survival for combination therapies in oncology.

Marcus Baaz, Tim Cardilin, Mats Jirstrand

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Marcus BaazFraunhofer-Chalmers Research Centre for Industrial Mathematics, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5098-017X
Tim CardilinFraunhofer-Chalmers Research Centre for Industrial Mathematics, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Mats JirstrandFraunhofer-Chalmers Research Centre for Industrial Mathematics, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6612-8037

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Progression-free survival (PFS) is an important clinical metric for comparing and evaluating similar treatments for the same disease within oncology. After the completion of a clinical trial, a descriptive analysis of the patients' PFS is often performed post hoc using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. However, to perform predictions, more sophisticated quantitative methods are needed. Tumor growth inhibition models are commonly used to describe and predict the dynamics of preclinical and clinical tumor size data. Moreover, frameworks also exist for describing the probability of different types of events, such as tumor metastasis or patient dropout. Combining these two types of models into a so-called joint model enables model-based prediction of PFS. In this paper, we have constructed a joint model from clinical data comparing the efficacy of FOLFOX against FOLFOX + panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The nonlinear mixed effects framework was used to quantify interindividual variability (IIV). The model describes tumor size and PFS data well, and showed good predictive capabilities using truncated as well as external data. A machine-learning guided analysis was performed to reduce unexplained IIV by incorporating patient covariates. The model-based approach illustrated in this paper could be useful to help design clinical trials or to determine new promising drug candidates for combination therapy trials.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCombined Modality TherapyHumansProgression-Free Survival

Identifiers

PMID37300376
PMCPMC10508530

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.