Cited by 6Mathematical Biology Tumor GrowthCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Quantitative Systems Pharmacology Modeling in Immuno-Oncology: Hypothesis Testing, Dose Optimization, and Efficacy Prediction

Open access
Wang, Hanwen, Arulraj, Theinmozhi, Ippolito, Alberto, Popel, Aleksander S.·2024·Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology

Abstract

Despite an increasing number of clinical trials, cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide in the past decade. Among all complex diseases, clinical trials in oncology have among the lowest success rates, in part due to the high intra- and inter-tumoral heterogeneity. There are more than a thousand cancer drugs and treatment combinations being investigated in ongoing clinical trials for various cancer subtypes, germline mutations, metastasis, etc. Particularly, treatments relying on the (re)activation of the immune system have become increasingly present in the clinical trial pipeline. However, the complexities of the immune response and cancer-immune interactions pose a challenge to the development of these therapies. Quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP), as a computational approach to predict tumor response to treatments of interest, can be used to conduct in silico clinical trials with virtual patients (and emergent use of digital twins) in place of real patients, thus lowering the time and cost of clinical trials. In line with improved mechanistic understanding of the human immune system and promising results from recent cancer immunotherapy, QSP models can play critical roles in model-informed drug development in immuno-oncology. In this chapter, we discuss how QSP models were designed to serve different study objectives, including hypothesis testing, dose optimization, and efficacy prediction, via case studies in immuno-oncology.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/164_2024_735

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, H., Arulraj, T., Ippolito, A., & Popel, A. S.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Popel, Aleksander S.
Venue
Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology
Published
2024
Volume
289
Pages
261-284
ISSN
  • 0171-2004 (ISSN-L)
  • 1865-0325
OpenAlex
W4405632892
Cited by
6
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3
FWCI
36.62
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Handbook of experimental pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA138264)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
quantitative systems pharmacology, cancer immunotherapy, hypothesis testing, dose optimization, efficacy prediction, in silico clinical trials, virtual patients, digital twin, model-informed drug development, antitumor immunity, tumor-immune interactions, tumor heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Network Pharmacology, Animals, Antineoplastic Agents, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Immunotherapy, Models, Biological, Neoplasms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review