ArticleNPJ precision oncology2025
Predicting survival in prospective clinical trials using weakly-supervised QSP.
Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) models of cancer immunity provide mechanistic insights into cellular dynamics and drug effects that are difficult to study clinically. However, their inability to predict patient survival mechanistically limits their utility in anti-cancer drug development. To overcome this, we link virtual patients from a QSP model to real clinical trial patients. Using data from atezolizumab trials in non-small cell lung cancer, we show that tumor-based linkage effectively captures survival outcomes. By treating linked survival and censoring as weak supervision labels, we trained survival models using only QSP model covariates, without clinical covariates. Our approach also predicts survival for treatments not included in training data. Specifically, we accurately estimated survival hazard ratios (HR) for chemotherapy monotherapy and atezolizumab plus chemotherapy combination. The predicted HR of 0.70 (95% prediction interval [PI] 0.55-0.86) closely matches the observed HR of 0.79 (95% PI 0.64-0.98) from the IMpower130 trial.
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.