Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42761162›Full record

SynthesisJournal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques2026

Integration of microphysiological systems with computational and digital twin modeling for pharmaceutical development: a systematic review.

Marzieh Soheili, Behdad Gilzad Kohan, Leila Rastegar, Yousef Moradi, Hamed Gilzad Kohan

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques, 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

5 authors.

Marzieh SoheiliCollege of Pharmacy, Western New England University, Springfield, MA, United States.
Behdad Gilzad KohanSchool of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, United States.
Leila RastegarSchool of Medicine, Jahrom University of Medical Sciences, Jahrom, Fars, Iran.
Yousef MoradiHealth Metrics and Evaluation Research Center, Research Institute for Health Development, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran.
Hamed Gilzad KohanCollege of Pharmacy, Western New England University, Springfield, MA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The pharmaceutical industry faces a productivity crisis, with only ∼10% of candidates reaching approval and development costs exceeding $1-2 billion per drug. Traditional preclinical models, particularly animal studies, show limited predictive validity for human outcomes. Microphysiological systems (MPS), including organ-on-chip devices, integrated with digital twin computational modeling, offer a promising route to improve translational prediction, yet no systematic assessment exists. Objectives: To identify, evaluate, and synthesize the published literature on integrating MPS with digital twin computational modeling for pharmaceutical development. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420251274941), PubMed and Europe PMC were searched from January 2010 to December 2025. Studies were included if they integrated MPS platforms with computational models (PBPK, QSP, IVIVE, PK/PD, or machine learning). Two-stage automated screening with independent verification by two researchers was applied. Data extraction captured organ systems, model types, platforms, validation approaches, pharmacokinetic parameters, software, and economic considerations. Results: Of 2,044 records, 123 studies met inclusion criteria. Publication activity grew exponentially (CAGR ∼35%), with 38.2% published in 2024-2025. Liver was the most represented organ (30.9%), followed by vasculature (19.5%), gut (18.7%), and immune components (17.1%). PBPK was the predominant computational approach (18.7%), followed by PK (12.2%), IVIVE (12.2%), and machine learning (9.8%). Commercially, Emulate led (55.8%), then Mimetas (23.3%) and CN Bio (19.2%); custom/academic platforms comprised 74.2%. Validation was robust, with 95.8% discussing clinical data comparisons and 77.5% reporting average fold error. Only liver-PBPK and liver-PK qualified as established combinations (>5 studies), with many organ-model pairings unexplored. Multi-organ systems showed accelerating adoption after 2021. Economic themes were discussed qualitatively, but formal health economic analyses were absent. Conclusion: MPS-digital twin integration has matured from an emerging concept into a research paradigm with demonstrated translational value. Validation practices are strong and aligned with regulatory expectations, supported by the FDA Modernization Act 2.0 and the ISTAND program's acceptance of Liver-Chip technology. Liver-focused applications are the most mature and should serve as a template for expansion. Priority gaps include kidney, lung, and brain MPS-computational integration, multi-organ systems, and rigorous health economic analyses. Continued standardization and regulatory engagement will be essential to realize this approach's potential.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationDrug DevelopmentMicrophysiological SystemsAnimalsHumansModels, Biologicaldigital twindrug developmentin vitro-to-in vivo extrapolationIVIVEmicrophysiological systems

Identifiers

PMID42761162
PMCPMC13585699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.