ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2025
An Integrative Mechanistic Model of Type 1 IFN-Mediated Inflammation in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating in vitro aerosol characterization and cross-species PBPK modeling to predict human lung exposure of inhaled therapeutic proteins.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026Article
- Identification of key programmed cell death genes-necroptosis-related genes in systemic lupus erythematosus.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Article
- Immunopathogenesis of accelerated atherosclerosis in systemic lupus erythematosus: from innate and adaptive dysregulation to clinical implications.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Quantitative systems pharmacology model of B cell immune response in mouse.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Type I interferon (IFN1) pathway-targeting therapies represent a highly promising class of remedies for the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus. However, the overall clinical benefit of these compounds is afflicted by marked variability. In this study, we developed a quantitative systems pharmacology model of type I IFN-mediated inflammation and applied it for an indirect comparison of anifrolumab, sifalimumab, daxdilimab, and litifilimab pharmacodynamic response, represented in the model by the change in IFN1 gene signature (IFNGS). The model consists of 20 ordinary differential equations and 68 parameters, among which four systemic parameters (including one random effect) were estimated using patient-level data from Phase IIb anifrolumab clinical trial. Within-target and within-pathway validation was performed using study-level pharmacokinetics, IFNα, and/or IFNGS data from five anifrolumab, four sifalimumab, one daxdilimab, and one litifilimab trials. The model successfully captured overall trends in IFNGS at clinically relevant doses of these compounds and discriminated IFNGS response between patients with low (< 2.75) and high (≥ 2.75) baseline IFNGS. Overprediction of treatment benefit was observed for the low range of anifrolumab doses (100-150 mg every 4 weeks). In contrast, IFNGS response under 150 mg of daxdilimab was underpredicted, despite the accurate description of plasmacytoid dendritic cells and IFNα biomarkers. Results of the global sensitivity analysis revealed baseline IFNGS, IFNα, and IFNα fraction as key factors affecting treatment benefit the most. In terms of maximum IFNGS reduction, anifrolumab showed superior potential compared to sifalimumab, daxdilimab, and litifilimab (ΔIFNGS~25%), which was further enhanced in patients with high baseline IFNGS or IFNα (ΔIFNGS~50%-60%).
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.