ReviewHandbook of experimental pharmacology2025
Application of Mechanistic Mathematical Modeling to Toxicology: Quantitative Systems Toxicology (QST).
Review in Handbook of experimental pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From venom peptides to neurotherapeutics: BmK defensins and short-chain peptides as modulators of ion channels.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantitative systems toxicology (QST) is emerging as an independent field of model-informed drug development (MIDD) with a focus on predicting toxicity endpoints. To enable toxicological predictions, QST models require incorporation of mechanistic details specific to safety applications including the ability to accurately model supratherapeutic doses and appropriately represent safety endpoints. Unique to the field of toxicology, mechanistic knowledge is often described through the use of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs), which formally represent existing knowledge about mechanisms of toxicity. The toxicities represented by QST models can arise from exaggerated or adverse pharmacological effects of engaging the drug's intended target (on-target toxicity) or from adverse events due to modulation of additional targets beyond the primary target (off-target toxicity). In cases of on-target toxicity, QST models can be considered as a type of Quantitative Systems Pharmacology (QSP) model that incorporates safety biomarkers and often includes simulations performed outside the therapeutic dose range to explore potential adverse consequences of exaggerated pharmacology in a pre-clinical or clinical setting. QST models assessing off-target toxicities can be considered distinct from QSP models in that they are typically applicable across molecules of a given modality which can (and often do) have different primary therapeutic targets. Off-target QST models commonly focus on the interrogation of general (e.g. pan-compound) toxicity mechanisms, often within a specific organ system. It can be difficult to categorize a model as purely QSP or QST (given that some models can be considered as both a QSP and a QST model), and therefore, we encourage readers to refer to a model based on its context of use and application. Thus, throughout this chapter, we refer to models as QST models when the context of use is to understand safety-related questions. To illustrate QST modeling approaches, examples of QST model applications for on-target and off-target toxicities at different stages of the drug discovery and development pipeline are presented and discussed. Additionally, contexts of use, triggers, key objectives, and potential impacts of QST models including the types of decisions QST applications can inform across drug discovery and development are reviewed. The chapter concludes with an overview of key challenges and future perspectives in the field of QST.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40802056What 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.