Abstract
AbstractThere is an inherent tension in Quantitative Systems Pharmacology (QSP) between the need to incorporate mathematical descriptions of complex physiology and drug targets with the necessity of developing robust, predictive and well-constrained models. In addition to this, there is no “gold standard” for model development and assessment in QSP. Moreover, there can be confusion over terminology such as model and parameter identifiability; complex and simple models; virtual populations; and other concepts, which leads to potential miscommunication and misapplication of methodologies within modeling communities, both the QSP community and related disciplines. This perspective article highlights the pros and cons of using simple (often identifiable) vs. complex (more physiologically detailed but often non-identifiable) models, as well as aspects of parameter identifiability, sensitivity and inference methodologies for model development and analysis. The paper distills the central themes of the issue of identifiability and optimal model size and discusses open challenges.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Computational Theory and Mathematics,General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,Pharmacology,General Environmental Science,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Mathematics,Immunology,General Neuroscience
Reference74 articles.
1. National Academies (2012) Assessing the reliability of complex models: mathematical and statistical foundations of verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification
2. Allen R, Moore H (2019) Perspectives on the role of mathematics in drug discovery and development. Bull Math Biol 81(9):3425–3435
3. Allen R, Musante CJ (2018) A mathematical analysis of adaptations to the metabolic fate of fructose in essential fructosuria subjects. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 315:E394–E403
4. Allen R, Rieger T, Musante C (2016) Efficient generation and selection of virtual populations in quantitative systems pharmacology models. CPT Pharm Syst Pharmacol. 5(3):140–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.12063
5. Bachmann J, Raue A, Schilling M, Bohm ME, Kreutz C, Kaschek D, Busch HS, Gretz N, Lehmann WD, Klingmuller U (2011) Division of labor by dual feedback regulators controls JAK2/STAT5 signaling over broad ligand range. Mol Syst Bio 7(1):516
Cited by
25 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献