ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2026
Follow-Up Bias in Tumor Dynamic Modeling: A Comparison of Classical and Neural-ODE Approaches.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tumor dynamic models are vital for evaluating oncology treatments and guiding clinical drug development decisions. However, few studies rigorously assess their predictive capabilities, especially when forecasting tumor trajectories from clinical trials with short or inconsistent follow-up across treatment arms. Poor predictive performance or biases related to follow-up time could potentially limit the general utility of tumor growth inhibition (TGI) models. This study quantitatively evaluates prediction bias across several established tumor dynamic models, comparing five classical pharmacometric TGI models with the deep learning-based Tumor Dynamic Neural-ODE (TDNODE) framework. Using time-truncated clinical trial data from 3106 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) across four completed atezolizumab phase III studies, we consistently observed moderate-to-high positive bias in the predictions from pharmacometric models, particularly with more limited follow-up. By examining the structures of these models and comparing them to observed data, we highlight how the assumed kinetic patterns potentially lead to biased parameter estimation and systemic overestimation of tumor size when applied to immature datasets. In contrast, the TDNODE framework, using deep learning, demonstrated promising early results, exhibiting improved predictive performance in the same evaluations. These findings underscore the critical need to address prediction bias in tumor dynamic modeling with immature data and to consider alternative approaches to established paradigms for certain drug development applications. This study also generally demonstrates the potential of novel methods, such as deep learning, to potentially enhance the reliability of tumor dynamics modeling, especially in challenging early-phase clinical decision-making scenarios.
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.