Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Clinical and Translational Science · September 29, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Oncology drug development continues to have a high attrition rate despite major advances in therapeutic modalities such as antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific antibodies, cell therapies, and cancer vaccines. Critical development decisions are often made under substantial uncertainty, creating a need for quantitative approaches that integrate diverse sources of evidence. Quantitative medicine (QM) and model-informed drug development (MIDD) provide a framework to support decision-making throughout the oncology drug development lifecycle by leveraging pharmacology, disease biology, clinical data, biomarkers, and computational modeling. This review highlights three potential applications of QM that address drug development challenges. First, tumor growth inhibition-overall survival (TGI-OS) modeling links longitudinal tumor dynamics with survival outcomes, enabling earlier assessment of treatment benefit and supporting Phase III go/no-go decisions using Phase Ib/II data. Second, pan-molecule modeling across multiple antibody-drug conjugates that share a common linker-payload construct. This QM approach characterizes the class-specific exposure-toxicity relationships and informs dose optimization strategies, as illustrated by peripheral neuropathy risk modeling for vc-MMAE-containing agents. Third, population pharmacokinetic modeling and clinical trial simulation can facilitate intravenous-to-subcutaneous bridging by predicting pharmacokinetic non-inferiority, optimizing dose selection, and reducing development risk, as demonstrated for pertuzumab/trastuzumab and atezolizumab. Collectively, these examples demonstrate how QM can improve confidence in critical development decisions, optimize benefit-risk assessment, and enhance development efficiency. Continued integration of quantitative approaches, including emerging artificial intelligence and mechanistic modeling methodologies, has the potential to improve the probability of success and accelerate the delivery of effective oncology therapies to patients.