1
|
Chasseloup E, Hooker AC, Karlsson MO. Generation and application of avatars in pharmacometric modelling. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2023; 50:411-423. [PMID: 37488327 PMCID: PMC10460751 DOI: 10.1007/s10928-023-09873-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/26/2023] [Indexed: 07/26/2023]
Abstract
Simulations from population models have critical applications in drug discovery and development. Avatars or digital twins, defined as individual simulations matching clinical criteria of interest compared to observations from a real subject within a predefined margin of accuracy, may be a better option for simulations performed to inform future drug development stages in cases where an adequate model is not achievable. The aim of this work was to (1) investigate methods for generating avatars with pharmacometric models, and (2) explore the properties of the generated avatars to assess the impact of the different selection settings on the number of avatars per subject, their closeness to the individual observations, and the properties of the selected samples subset from the theoretical model parameters probability density function. Avatars were generated using different combinations of nature and number of clinical criteria, accuracy of agreement, and/or number of simulations for two examples models previously published (hemato-toxicity and integrated glucose-insulin model). The avatar distribution could be used to assess the appropriateness of the models assumed parameter distribution. Similarly it could be used to assess the models ability to properly describe the trajectories of the observations. Avatars can give nuanced information regarding the ability of a model to simulate data similar to the observations both at the population and at the individual level. Further potential applications for avatars may be as a diagnostic tool, an alternative to simulations with insurance to replicate key clinical features, and as an individual measure of model fit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Estelle Chasseloup
- Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Box 580, Uppsala, 75123, Sweden
| | - Andrew C Hooker
- Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Box 580, Uppsala, 75123, Sweden
| | - Mats O Karlsson
- Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Box 580, Uppsala, 75123, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kiriiri GK, Njogu PM, Mwangi AN. Exploring different approaches to improve the success of drug discovery and development projects: a review. FUTURE JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES 2020. [DOI: 10.1186/s43094-020-00047-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
There has been a significant increase in the cost and timeline of delivering new drugs for clinical use over the last three decades. Despite the increased investments in research infrastructure by pharmaceutical companies and technological advances in the scientific tools available, efforts to increase the number of molecules coming through the drug development pipeline have largely been unfruitful.
Main body
A non-systematic review of the current literature was undertaken to enumerate the various strategies employed to improve the success rates in the pharmaceutical research and development. The review covers the exploitation of genomics and proteomics, complementarity of target-based and phenotypic efficacy screening platforms, drug repurposing and repositioning, collaborative research, focusing on underserved therapeutic fields, outsourcing strategy, and pharmaceutical modeling and artificial intelligence. Examples of successful drug discoveries achieved through application of these strategies are highlighted and discussed herein.
Conclusions
Genomics and proteomics have uncovered a wide array of potential drug targets and are facilitative of enhanced scrupulous target identification and validation thus reducing efficacy-related drug attrition. When used complementarily, phenotypic and target-based screening platforms would likely allow serendipitous drug discovery while increasing rationality in drug design. Drug repurposing and repositioning reduces financial risks in drug development accompanied by cost and time savings, while prolonging patent exclusivity hence increased returns on investment to the innovator company. Equally important, collaborative research is facilitative of cross-fertilization and refinement of ideas, while sharing resources and expertise, hence reducing overhead costs in the early stages of drug discovery. Underserved therapeutic fields are niche drug discovery areas that may be used to experiment and launch novel drug targets, while exploiting incentivized benefits afforded by drug regulatory authorities. Outsourcing allows the pharma industries to focus on their core competencies while deriving greater efficiency of specialist contract research organizations. The existing and emerging pharmaceutical modeling and artificial intelligence softwares and tools allow for in silico computation enabling more efficient computer-aided drug design. Careful selection and application of these strategies, singly or in combination, may potentially harness pharmaceutical research and innovation.
Collapse
|
3
|
Gong C, Milberg O, Wang B, Vicini P, Narwal R, Roskos L, Popel AS. A computational multiscale agent-based model for simulating spatio-temporal tumour immune response to PD1 and PDL1 inhibition. J R Soc Interface 2018; 14:rsif.2017.0320. [PMID: 28931635 PMCID: PMC5636269 DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2017.0320] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2017] [Accepted: 08/30/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
When the immune system responds to tumour development, patterns of immune infiltrates emerge, highlighted by the expression of immune checkpoint-related molecules such as PDL1 on the surface of cancer cells. Such spatial heterogeneity carries information on intrinsic characteristics of the tumour lesion for individual patients, and thus is a potential source for biomarkers for anti-tumour therapeutics. We developed a systems biology multiscale agent-based model to capture the interactions between immune cells and cancer cells, and analysed the emergent global behaviour during tumour development and immunotherapy. Using this model, we are able to reproduce temporal dynamics of cytotoxic T cells and cancer cells during tumour progression, as well as three-dimensional spatial distributions of these cells. By varying the characteristics of the neoantigen profile of individual patients, such as mutational burden and antigen strength, a spectrum of pretreatment spatial patterns of PDL1 expression is generated in our simulations, resembling immuno-architectures obtained via immunohistochemistry from patient biopsies. By correlating these spatial characteristics with in silico treatment results using immune checkpoint inhibitors, the model provides a framework for use to predict treatment/biomarker combinations in different cancer types based on cancer-specific experimental data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang Gong
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
| | - Oleg Milberg
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Aleksander S Popel
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.,Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Musuamba FT, Manolis E, Holford N, Cheung S, Friberg LE, Ogungbenro K, Posch M, Yates J, Berry S, Thomas N, Corriol-Rohou S, Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Hooker AC, Van der Graaf PH, Standing JF, Hay J, Cole S, Gigante V, Karlsson K, Dumortier T, Benda N, Serone F, Das S, Brochot A, Ehmann F, Hemmings R, Rusten IS. Advanced Methods for Dose and Regimen Finding During Drug Development: Summary of the EMA/EFPIA Workshop on Dose Finding (London 4-5 December 2014). CPT-PHARMACOMETRICS & SYSTEMS PHARMACOLOGY 2017; 6:418-429. [PMID: 28722322 PMCID: PMC5529745 DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2016] [Revised: 03/27/2017] [Accepted: 03/27/2017] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
Inadequate dose selection for confirmatory trials is currently still one of the most challenging issues in drug development, as illustrated by high rates of late‐stage attritions in clinical development and postmarketing commitments required by regulatory institutions. In an effort to shift the current paradigm in dose and regimen selection and highlight the availability and usefulness of well‐established and regulatory‐acceptable methods, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in collaboration with the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries Association (EFPIA) hosted a multistakeholder workshop on dose finding (London 4–5 December 2014). Some methodologies that could constitute a toolkit for drug developers and regulators were presented. These methods are described in the present report: they include five advanced methods for data analysis (empirical regression models, pharmacometrics models, quantitative systems pharmacology models, MCP‐Mod, and model averaging) and three methods for study design optimization (Fisher information matrix (FIM)‐based methods, clinical trial simulations, and adaptive studies). Pairwise comparisons were also discussed during the workshop; however, mostly for historical reasons. This paper discusses the added value and limitations of these methods as well as challenges for their implementation. Some applications in different therapeutic areas are also summarized, in line with the discussions at the workshop. There was agreement at the workshop on the fact that selection of dose for phase III is an estimation problem and should not be addressed via hypothesis testing. Dose selection for phase III trials should be informed by well‐designed dose‐finding studies; however, the specific choice of method(s) will depend on several aspects and it is not possible to recommend a generalized decision tree. There are many valuable methods available, the methods are not mutually exclusive, and they should be used in conjunction to ensure a scientifically rigorous understanding of the dosing rationale.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F T Musuamba
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium.,UMR850 INSERM, Université de Limoges, Limoges, France
| | - E Manolis
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,European Medicines Agency, London, UK
| | - N Holford
- Department of Pharmacology & Clinical Pharmacology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | | | | | | - M Posch
- Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - S Berry
- Berry consultants, Austin, Texas, USA
| | | | | | | | - F Bretz
- Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Novartis, London, UK
| | | | - P H Van der Graaf
- Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Certara QSP, Canterbury, UK
| | - J F Standing
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,University College London, London, UK
| | - J Hay
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, UK
| | - S Cole
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, UK
| | - V Gigante
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, Roma, Italy
| | - K Karlsson
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Medical Products Agency, Uppsala, Sweden
| | | | - N Benda
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, Bonn, Germany
| | - F Serone
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, Roma, Italy
| | - S Das
- AstraZeneca UK Limited, London, UK
| | | | - F Ehmann
- European Medicines Agency, London, UK
| | - R Hemmings
- Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, UK
| | - I Skottheim Rusten
- EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.,Norvegian Medicines Agency, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|