Comparison of null models for combination drug therapy reveals Hand model as biochemically most plausible.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 02 2019
28 02 2019
Historique:
received:
24
10
2018
accepted:
14
01
2019
entrez:
1
3
2019
pubmed:
1
3
2019
medline:
17
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Null models for the effect of combination therapies are widely used to evaluate synergy and antagonism of drugs. Due to the relevance of null models, their suitability is continuously discussed. Here, we contribute to the discussion by investigating the properties of five null models. Our study includes the model proposed by David J. Hand, which we refer to as Hand model. The Hand model has been introduced almost 20 years ago but hardly was used and studied. We show that the Hand model generalizes the principle of dose equivalence compared to the Loewe model and resolves the ambiguity of the Tallarida model. This provides a solution to the persisting conflict about the compatibility of two essential model properties: the sham combination principle and the principle of dose equivalence. By embedding several null models into a common framework, we shed light in their biochemical validity and provide indications that the Hand model is biochemically most plausible. We illustrate the practical implications and differences between null models by examining differences of null models on published data.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30816136
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-38907-x
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-38907-x
pmc: PMC6395630
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3002Références
Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Apr;184:112-130
pubmed: 29129643
J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2004 Sep;310(3):981-6
pubmed: 15175417
J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2006 Oct;319(1):1-7
pubmed: 16670349
Cell. 2017 Dec 14;171(7):1678-1691.e13
pubmed: 29245013
Biometrics. 2010 Dec;66(4):1275-83
pubmed: 20337630
Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2016 Mar 1;98:19-34
pubmed: 26546751
J Mol Cell Cardiol. 1998 Apr;30(4):723-31
pubmed: 9602421
J Biol Chem. 2017 Oct 6;292(40):16498-16510
pubmed: 28696261
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2014 Nov;58(10):1165-81
pubmed: 25124340
Am J Pathol. 2011 May;178(5):1940-8
pubmed: 21514411
Nat Biotechnol. 2014 Dec;32(12):1213-22
pubmed: 25419740
Nat Commun. 2017 Dec 14;8(1):2129
pubmed: 29242552
J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2006 Jan;316(1):476-8; author reply 479
pubmed: 16371451
Clin Exp Immunol. 1977 Apr;28(1):1-18
pubmed: 324671
Mol Cancer Ther. 2016 Jun;15(6):1155-62
pubmed: 26983881
Eur J Biochem. 1981 Mar 16;115(1):207-16
pubmed: 7227366
Adv Enzyme Regul. 1984;22:27-55
pubmed: 6382953
J Pain. 2011 Feb;12(2):157-66
pubmed: 20851058
Sci Rep. 2016 May 10;6:25523
pubmed: 27160857
Pharmacol Rev. 1989 Jun;41(2):93-141
pubmed: 2692037
Sci Rep. 2017 Dec 20;7(1):17935
pubmed: 29263342
Life Sci. 1989;45(11):947-61
pubmed: 2677570
Cancer Discov. 2014 Sep;4(9):1036-45
pubmed: 25074459
Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2015 Jun;3(3):e00149
pubmed: 26171228
Pharmacol Rev. 1995 Jun;47(2):331-85
pubmed: 7568331
Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2008 Nov;378(5):483-92
pubmed: 18566800
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2013 Feb 1;304(3):E237-53
pubmed: 23211518
Arzneimittelforschung. 1953 Jun;3(6):285-90
pubmed: 13081480
Nat Chem Biol. 2006 Sep;2(9):458-66
pubmed: 16921358
Bull N Y Acad Med. 1975 Oct;51(9):1020-38
pubmed: 1102002
Eur J Pharmacol. 2018 Jan 15;819:217-224
pubmed: 29183835
Genes Cancer. 2011 Nov;2(11):1003-8
pubmed: 22737266
Crit Rev Toxicol. 2009;39(5):418-26
pubmed: 19514914