ReviewJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2024
Prospective approaches to gene therapy computational modeling - spotlight on viral gene therapy.
Review in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mathematical and Computational Models of Biochemical Reactions and Cell Signaling-From Ordinary Differential Equations to Machine Learning.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Development of an Agent-Based Model to Investigate Durability of Factor IX Activity in Hemophilia B Patients Treated With Etranacogene Dezaparvovec.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Article
- A translational physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model for MMAE-based antibody-drug conjugates.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2025Article
- Evaluation of prompt engineering strategies for pharmacokinetic data analysis with the ChatGPT large language model.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical studies have found there still exists a lack of gene therapy dose-toxicity and dose-efficacy data that causes gene therapy dose selection to remain elusive. Model informed drug development (MIDD) has become a standard tool implemented throughout the discovery, development, and approval of pharmaceutical therapies, and has the potential to inform dose-toxicity and dose-efficacy relationships to support gene therapy dose selection. Despite this potential, MIDD approaches for gene therapy remain immature and require standardization to be useful for gene therapy clinical programs. With the goal to advance MIDD approaches for gene therapy, in this review we first provide an overview of gene therapy types and how they differ from a bioanalytical, formulation, route of administration, and regulatory standpoint. With this biological and regulatory background, we propose how MIDD can be advanced for AAV-based gene therapies by utilizing physiological based pharmacokinetic modeling and quantitative systems pharmacology to holistically inform AAV and target protein dynamics following dosing. We discuss how this proposed model, allowing for in-depth exploration of AAV pharmacology, could be the key the field needs to treat these unmet disease populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.