De-risking clinical trial failure through mechanistic simulation.

IF 4.1 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Immunotherapy advances Pub Date : 2022-08-23 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1093/immadv/ltac017
Liam V Brown, Jonathan Wagg, Rachel Darley, Andy van Hateren, Tim Elliott, Eamonn A Gaffney, Mark C Coles
{"title":"De-risking clinical trial failure through mechanistic simulation.","authors":"Liam V Brown,&nbsp;Jonathan Wagg,&nbsp;Rachel Darley,&nbsp;Andy van Hateren,&nbsp;Tim Elliott,&nbsp;Eamonn A Gaffney,&nbsp;Mark C Coles","doi":"10.1093/immadv/ltac017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Drug development typically comprises a combination of pre-clinical experimentation, clinical trials, and statistical data-driven analyses. Therapeutic failure in late-stage clinical development costs the pharmaceutical industry billions of USD per year. Clinical trial simulation represents a key derisking strategy and combining them with mechanistic models allows one to test hypotheses for mechanisms of failure and to improve trial designs. This is illustrated with a T-cell activation model, used to simulate the clinical trials of IMA901, a short-peptide cancer vaccine. Simulation results were consistent with observed outcomes and predicted that responses are limited by peptide off-rates, peptide competition for dendritic cell (DC) binding, and DC migration times. These insights were used to hypothesise alternate trial designs predicted to improve efficacy outcomes. This framework illustrates how mechanistic models can complement clinical, experimental, and data-driven studies to understand, test, and improve trial designs, and how results may differ between humans and mice.</p>","PeriodicalId":73353,"journal":{"name":"Immunotherapy advances","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9514113/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Immunotherapy advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/immadv/ltac017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Drug development typically comprises a combination of pre-clinical experimentation, clinical trials, and statistical data-driven analyses. Therapeutic failure in late-stage clinical development costs the pharmaceutical industry billions of USD per year. Clinical trial simulation represents a key derisking strategy and combining them with mechanistic models allows one to test hypotheses for mechanisms of failure and to improve trial designs. This is illustrated with a T-cell activation model, used to simulate the clinical trials of IMA901, a short-peptide cancer vaccine. Simulation results were consistent with observed outcomes and predicted that responses are limited by peptide off-rates, peptide competition for dendritic cell (DC) binding, and DC migration times. These insights were used to hypothesise alternate trial designs predicted to improve efficacy outcomes. This framework illustrates how mechanistic models can complement clinical, experimental, and data-driven studies to understand, test, and improve trial designs, and how results may differ between humans and mice.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

通过机制模拟降低临床试验失败的风险。
药物开发通常包括临床前实验、临床试验和统计数据驱动分析的组合。临床开发后期的治疗失败每年给制药业造成数十亿美元的损失。临床试验模拟是一种关键的降低风险策略,将它们与机制模型相结合,可以检验失败机制的假设,并改进试验设计。t细胞活化模型用于模拟短肽癌症疫苗IMA901的临床试验,说明了这一点。模拟结果与观察结果一致,并预测反应受到肽脱落率、肽竞争树突状细胞(DC)结合和DC迁移时间的限制。这些见解被用于假设可改善疗效结果的替代试验设计。该框架说明了机制模型如何补充临床、实验和数据驱动的研究,以理解、测试和改进试验设计,以及人类和小鼠之间的结果如何不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信