ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
A comparative computational analysis of IFN-alpha pharmacokinetics and its induced cellular response in mice and humans.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 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
- Data-intensive immune network modelling for One Health.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Characterization of an immunocompetent, young adult mouse model for studying chikungunya virus neuroinvasion and central nervous system infection.PLoS pathogens · 2026Article
- From Genetic Engineering to Preclinical Safety: A Study on Recombinant Human Interferons.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
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
Drug effects are difficult to investigate in detail in vivo. However, a mechanistic understanding of drug action is clearly beneficial for both pharmaceutical development as well as for optimization of treatment designs. We here established a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) mouse model which simultaneously describes whole-body pharmacokinetics of murine IFN-α as well as the cellular pharmacodynamic effect through the antiviral response biomarker Mx2. To this end, a dynamic model of intracellular IFN-α signalling in the JAK/STAT pathway was combined with a whole-body physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model of IFN-α in mice. The pharmacodynamic behaviour of the resulting mouse IFN-α QSP model was first compared to a cellular model of the JAK/STAT pathway to compare in vitro and in vivo drug effects and to identify functional differences. It was found that the in vitro drug effect in the cellular model overestimates the in vivo response in mice at least by a factor of two which is partly due to the missing drug clearance in vitro. Also, the drug responses in the in vitro model were time delayed. Interspecies analyses in murine and a previously published human QSP model of IFN-α next show a similar dynamic behavior. However, our models demonstrate eight to 16-fold stronger response levels in mice than in humans due to more efficient interferon binding. Our analysis supports a mechanistic analysis of both upstream pharmacokinetic as well as downstream pharmacodynamic drug effects through the combination of physiological knowledge and quantitative computational models. The study hence shows potential applications for QSP modelling in terms of study planning, for example by choosing physiologically relevant in vitro concentrations. Also, the QSP model allows inter-species comparisons of the effect strength in specific functional readouts, which in humans are otherwise not possible due to the limited sampling possibilities. We expect QSP modelling to play an increasingly important role in drug development and research in the future.
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.