ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2025
Leveraging large language models to compare perspectives on integrating QSP and AI/ML.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structured Schemas for Provenance-Rich, LLM-Assisted QSP Model Calibration.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Article
- Structured Schemas for Provenance-Rich, LLM-Assisted QSP Model Calibration.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- The dawn of a new era: can machine learning and large language models reshape QSP modeling?Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2025Review
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
Two recent papers offer contrasting perspectives on integrating Quantitative Systems Pharmacology (QSP) and Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML): one views QSP as the primary driver using AI/ML to enhance computational tasks, while the other argues that AI/ML should provide an alternative mechanistic framework. Rather than perpetuate this tension, we used Large Language Models (LLMs) to examine both papers in two tests-one comparing their core arguments and another probing which methodology LLM should take precedence. Repeating each test multiple times with an identical and neutral prompt, the LLM revealed that each perspective suits specific stages of the drug development pipeline. QSP offers mechanistic rigor and regulatory clarity, and AI/ML excels in high-dimensional data analysis and exploratory modeling. A hybrid approach might best serve researchers and decision-makers, especially when harmonizing data-driven insights with mechanistic integrity. This exercise also highlights the potential of LLMs as promising tools for synthesizing complex information, offering an arguably less biased viewpoint that can trigger deeper discussion from the broader community seeking to align QSP and AI/ML in model-informed drug development (MIDD). By combining our human expertise with AI-driven analyses, we hope to further discuss with the scientific community how QSP and AI/ML-and the synergy between them-can drive innovation in therapeutic discovery and optimization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40325298What 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.