Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41919988›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2026

Follow-Up Bias in Tumor Dynamic Modeling: A Comparison of Classical and Neural-ODE Approaches.

David C Turner, Mark Laurie, Shuhui Li, Huy X Ngo, Chunze Li, Jin Y Jin, James Lu, Logan Brooks

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

David C TurnerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9242-6188
Mark LaurieDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.
Shuhui LiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5200-4754
Huy X NgoDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5013-1509
Chunze LiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8906-6553
Jin Y JinDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3627-0323
James LuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9687-5607
Logan BrooksDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Genentech, South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9215-408X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Antineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsModels, BiologicalBiasClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDeep LearningFollow-Up StudiesHumansPredictive Learning ModelsAntineoplastic Agentsartificial intelligencemachine learningMIDDoncologytumor dynamic modeling

Identifiers

PMID41919988
PMCPMC13042841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.