Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37328956›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2023

Using machine learning surrogate modeling for faster QSP VP cohort generation.

Renée C Myers, Florian Augustin, Jérémy Huard, Christina M Friedrich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Is Ockham's razor losing its edge? New perspectives on the principle of model parsimony.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Review
  12. Future Directions for Quantitative Systems Pharmacology.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2025
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Quantitative systems pharmacology in the age of artificial intelligence.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Renée C MyersRosa & Co, San Carlos, California, USA.
Florian AugustinThe MathWorks Inc, Natick, Massachusetts, USA.
Jérémy HuardThe MathWorks GmbH, Munich, Germany.
Christina M FriedrichRosa & Co, San Carlos, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Virtual patients (VPs) are widely used within quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) modeling to explore the impact of variability and uncertainty on clinical responses. In one method of generating VPs, parameters are sampled randomly from a distribution, and possible VPs are accepted or rejected based on constraints on model output behavior. This approach works but can be inefficient (i.e., the vast majority of model runs typically do not result in valid VPs). Machine learning surrogate models offer an opportunity to improve the efficiency of VP creation significantly. In this approach, surrogate models are trained using the full QSP model and subsequently used to rapidly pre-screen for parameter combinations that result in feasible VPs. The overwhelming majority of parameter combinations pre-vetted using the surrogate models result in valid VPs when tested in the original QSP model. This tutorial presents this novel workflow and demonstrates how a surrogate model software application can be used to select and optimize the surrogate models in a case study. We then discuss the relative efficiency of the methods and scalability of the proposed method.

Indexed as

Network PharmacologySoftwareHumansUncertaintyWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID37328956
PMCPMC10431055

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.