Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42147331›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026

Analysis of rat toxicology studies: statistical agreement between virtual and concurrent controls in detecting treatment effects on liver enzymes.

Guillemette Duchateau-Nguyen, Matteo Piraino, Dragomir Ivanov Draganov, Pierre Maliver, Wolfgang Muster, Martina Stirn, Paolo Piraino

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in 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

7 authors.

Guillemette Duchateau-NguyenF. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Computational Sciences Center of Excellence, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Matteo PirainoOrganon SRL, Bucharest, Romania.
Dragomir Ivanov DraganovF. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Computational Sciences Center of Excellence, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Pierre MaliverF. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Wolfgang MusterF. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Martina StirnF. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Paolo PirainoOrganon SRL, Bucharest, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Virtual control groups (VCGs) are proposed as a means to reduce reliance on live animals in preclinical toxicology studies. Despite the potential benefits of VCGs, concerns remain regarding their comparability to traditional concurrent control groups (CCGs), and the risk of introducing bias into preclinical toxicology research. Our simulation focused on observing the statistical consequences of replacing the CCG (fully or partially) with VCGs derived from historical data, assessing their feasibility and limitations, and determining if VCG use alters study conclusions on selected toxicological endpoints. Methods: We conducted simulations comparing liver enzyme activity in studies using VCGs and those using CCGs. VCGs were generated by simple matching using a limited set of criteria to a large-scale dataset. One hundred VCGs were generated for each reanalyzed study and the percentage of agreement with CCGs was then assessed across a variety of statistical measures for a selection of endpoints, i.e., liver enzymes and bodyweight. Results: Full agreement was observed in 46.9% of the performed comparisons between VCGs and CCGs, while full disagreement was noted in 2.6% of comparisons. For the remaining instances of partial agreement, the sampled VCGs predominantly aligned with the CCGs. Discrepancies observed did not consistently affect all measured endpoints within a given analyzed study; they were especially noted when CCG enzyme activity levels approached the boundaries of reference intervals, differing significantly from the majority of the other controls in the database. Partial replacement of CCG with VCG improved the overall agreement. The likelihood of reaching a different conclusion for the overall study outcome was considered to be low. Among the statistical methods used for comparing controls versus treated animals, the method based on the calculation of effect size appeared to be the most appropriate to use, especially with our resampling approach. Discussion: Our results suggest VCGs could be a potential alternative to CCGs. Key next steps that will need to be addressed include enhancing datasets with richer metadata and standardizing variables across studies to facilitate the selection of matching criteria, refining methods for managing outliers and hypothesis testing, and establishing proxy variables for animal growth.

Indexed as

concurrent control groupliver enzyme activitypreclinical toxicologysimulationvirtual control group

Identifiers

PMID42147331
PMCPMC13172619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.