In silico prediction of clinical efficacy

Current Opinion in Biotechnology

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 666-670

  Michelson, Seth ^a   Sehgal, Anil ^a   Friedrich, Christina ^a  

^a Entelos Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DISEASES; DRUG PRODUCTS PLANTS; DRUG THERAPY; GENES; MONTE CARLO METHODS; PHARMACODYNAMICS; PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

BIOSIMULATION; CLINICAL EFFICACY; GENOMIC EXPRESSION;

DRUG PRODUCTS;

GRANULOCYTE COLONY STIMULATING FACTOR; HEPARIN; HYDRAZINE; ISONIAZID; SUXAMETHONIUM;

ANALYTIC METHOD; COMPUTER MODEL; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE MODEL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG METABOLISM; GENE EXPRESSION; GENETIC ANALYSIS; HUMAN; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NONHUMAN; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHARMACOGENETICS; PHARMACOGENOMICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

CLINICAL TRIALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EVALUATION; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHARMACOGENETICS;

EID: 33751219856     PISSN: 09581669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2006.09.004     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. DiMasi J., Hansen R., and Grabowski H. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 22 (2003) 151-185
2. UCSF, Center for Drug Development Science: Simulation in drug development: good practices. 1999; URL: http://cdds.ucsf.edu/research/sddgpreport.php
3. Simogyi R., and Greller L.D. The dynamics of molecular networks: applications to therapeutic discovery. Drug Disc Today 6 (2001) 1267-1277
4. Friedrich C.M., and Paterson T.S. In silico predictions of target clinical efficacy. Drug Disc Today 3 (2004) 216-222
5. Ho R.L. Biosystems modelling for in silico target validation: challenges to implementation. Emerging Therapeutic Targets 4 (2000) 699-714
6. Hall K., Baillie R., and Michelson S. Biosimulation: dynamic modeling of biological systems. Annu Rep Med Chem 37 (2002) 279-288
7. Scherrer D., French J.M., and Michelson S. Assessing the impact of biosimulation on target selection and validation. Biosilico 1 (2003) 184-188
8. Arkelyan L., Merbl Y., and Agur Z. Vessel maturation effects on tumour growth: validation of a computer model in implanted human carcinoma spheroids. Eur J Cancer 41 (2005) 159-167
9. Arkelyan L., Vainstein V., and Agur Z. A computer algorithm describing the process of vessel formation and maturation, and its use for predicting the effects of anti-angiogenic and anti-maturation therapy on vascular tumor growth. Angiogenesis 5 (2002) 203-214
10. Hart D., Shochat E., and Agur Z. The growth law of primary breast cancer as inferred from mammography screening trials data. Br J Cancer 78 (1998) 382-387
11. Noble D., Levin J., and Scott W. Biological simulations in drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 4 (1999) 10-16
12. Noble D. Modeling the heart - from genes to cells to the whole organ. Science 295 (2002) 1678-1682
13. Boobis A., Gundert-Remy U., Kremers P., Macheras P., and Pelkonen O. In silico prediction of ADME and pharmacokinetics. Report of an expert meeting organised by COST B15. Eur J Pharm Sci 17 (2002) 183-193
14. Hu Y., Akland G.G., Pellizzari E.D., Berry M.R., and Melnyk L.J. Use of pharmacokinetic modeling to design studies for pathway specific exposure model evaluation. Environ Health Perspect 112 (2004) 1697-1703
15. Norris D.A., Leesman G.D., Sinko P.J., and Grass G.M. Development of predictive pharmacokinetic simulation models for drug discovery. J Control Release 65 (2000) 55-62
16. Sarkar C.A., and Lauffenburger D.A. Cell-level pharmacokinetic model of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: implications for ligand lifetime and potency in vivo. Mol Pharmacol 63 (2003) 147-158
17. Chien J.Y., Friedrich S., Heathman M.A., de Alwis D.P., and Sinha V. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and the stages of drug development: role of modeling and simulation. AAPS J 7 (2005) E544-E559. A review of the application of modeling and simulation technologies for the estimation and characterization of PK and PD effects in a clinical population. See especially Table 1 in this review for an excellent overview of the drug development pipeline and the role that modeling and simulation can play in each.
18. Ebling W.F., and Levy G. Population pharmacodynamics: strategies for concentration- and effect-controlled clinical trials. Ann Pharmacother 30 (1996) 12-19
19. Roy A., and Ette E.I. A pragmatic approach to the design of population pharmacokinetic studies. AAPS J 7 (2005) E408-E420. An excellent overview of the practical requirements to design, implement, and interpret population PK/PD studies. Included is a comparison between two simulation/analysis strategies (D-optimal designs and informative block designs) and their relative efficiencies in the derivation of the PK parameters of interest.
20. Weinshilboum R. Inheritance and drug response. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 529-537
21. Evans W.E., and McLeod H.L. Pharmacogenomics - drug disposition, drug targets, and side effects. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 538-549
22. Ekins S., Nikolsky Y., and Nikolskaya T. Techniques: application of systems biology to absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion and toxicity. Trends Pharmacol Sci 26 (2005) 202-209
23. Fielden M.R., Matthews J.B., Fertuck K.C., Halgren R.G., and Zacharewski T.R. In silico approaches to mechanistic and predictive toxicology: an introduction to bioinformatics for toxicologists. Crit Rev Toxicol 32 (2002) 67-112
24. Makretsov N.A., Huntsman D.G., Nielsen T.O., Yorida E., Peacock M., Cheang M.C., Dunn S.E., Hayes M., van de R.M., Bajdik C., and Gilks C.B. Hierarchical clustering analysis of tissue microarray immunostaining data identifies prognostically significant groups of breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 10 (2004) 6143-6151
25. Kari L., Loboda A., Nebozhyn M., Rook A.H., Vonderheid E.C., Nichols C., Virok D., Chang C., Horng W.H., Johnston J., et al. Classification and prediction of survival in patients with the leukemic phase of cutaneous T cell lymphoma. J Exp Med 197 (2003) 1477-1488
26. Zhao Y., and Karypis G. Data clustering in life sciences. Mol Biotechnol 31 (2005) 55-80
27. Ludwig J.A., and Weinstein J.N. Biomarkers in cancer staging, prognosis and treatment selection. Nat Rev Cancer 5 (2005) 845-856
28. Furey T.S., Cristianini N., Duffy N., Bednarski D.W., Schummer M., and Haussler D. Support vector machine classification and validation of cancer tissue samples using microarray expression data. Bioinformatics 16 (2000) 906-914
29. Tamayo P., Slonim D., Meisrov J., Zhu Q., Kitareewan S., Dmitrovsky E., Lander E., and Golub T. Interpreting patterns of gene expression with self-organizing maps: methods and application to hematopoietic differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96 (1999) 2907-2912
30. Wang D, Ressom H, Musavi M, Domnisoru C: Double self-organizing maps to cluster gene expression data. ESANN′2002 proceedings - European Symposium on Artificial Neural Networks; Bruges, Belgium, 24-26 April 2002, pp. 45-50.
31. Zhang H., Yu C.-Y., and Singer B. Cell and tumor classification using gene expression data: Construction of forests. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100 (2003) 4168-4172
32. Wigle D.A., Tsao M., and Jurisica I. Making sense of lung cancer gene-expression profiles. Genome Biol 5 (2004) 309-311
33. Michelson S. The impact of systems biology and biosimulation on drug discovery and development. Mol Biosyst 2 (2006) 288-291
34. Bonate P.L. Clinical trial simulation in drug development. Pharm Res 17 (2000) 252-256
35. Kansal A., and Trimmer J. Application of predictive biosimulation within pharmaceutical clinical development: examples of significance for translational medicine and clinical trial design. IEE Proc-Syst Biol 152 (2006) 214-220
36. Poland B., and Wada R. Combining drug-disease and economic modelling to inform drug development decisions. Drug Discov Today 6 (2001) 1165-1170
37. Gieschke R., Reigner B.G., and Steimer J.L. Exploring clinical study design by computer simulation based on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 35 (1997) 469-474
38. Lynd L.D., and O'Brien B.J. Advances in risk-benefit evaluation using probabilistic simulation methods: an application to the prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis. J Clin Epidemiol 57 (2004) 795-803
39. Eddy D.M., and Schlessinger L. Archimedes: a trial-validated model of diabetes. Diabetes Care 26 (2003) 3093-3101
40. Eddy D.M., and Schlessinger L. Validation of the Archimedes diabetes model. Diabetes Care 26 (2003) 3102-3110
41. Trimmer J, McKenna C, Sudbeck B, Ho R: Use of systems biology in clinical development: design and prediction of a type 2 diabetes clinical Trial. PAREXEL Pharmaceutical R&D Sourcebook 2004 p.131.
42. Skomorovski K., Harpak H., Ivanovski A., Vardi M., Visser T.P., Hartong S., van Vliet H., Wagemaker G., and Agur Z. New TPO treatment schedules of increased safety and efficacy: pre-clincial validation of a thrombopoiesis simulation model. Br J Haemtol 123 (2003) 683-691