IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v16y2025i1d10.1038_s41467-025-65218-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improved analysis of in vivo drug combination experiments with a comprehensive statistical framework and web-tool

Author

Listed:
  • Rafael Romero-Becerra

    (Oslo University Hospital, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research
    University of Oslo, Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology (OCBE))

  • Zhi Zhao

    (University of Oslo, Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology (OCBE))

  • Daniel Nebdal

    (Oslo University Hospital, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research)

  • Elisabeth Müller

    (Oslo University Hospital, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research
    Center for Cancer Immunotherapy and Immunobiology, Division of Integrated High-Order Regulatory Systems)

  • Helga Bergholtz

    (Oslo University Hospital, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research)

  • Jens Henrik Norum

    (Oslo University Hospital, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research)

  • Tero Aittokallio

    (Oslo University Hospital, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research
    University of Oslo, Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology (OCBE)
    University of Helsinki, Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE
    University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, iCAN Digital Precision Cancer Medicine Flagship)

Abstract

Drug combination therapy is often required to overcome the limited benefits of monotherapy in cancer treatment. While several tools exist for in vitro drug synergy screening and assessment, there is a lack of integrated methods for statistical analysis of in vivo combination experiments. To fill this gap, we present SynergyLMM, a comprehensive modeling and design framework for evaluating drug combination effects in preclinical in vivo studies. Unlike other methods, SynergyLMM accommodates complex experimental designs, including multi-drug combinations, and offers practical options for statistical analysis of both synergy and antagonism through longitudinal drug interaction analysis, including model diagnostics and statistical power analysis. These functionalities allow researchers to optimize study designs and determine an appropriate number of animals and follow-up time points required to achieve sufficient synergy and statistical power. SynergyLMM is implemented as an easy-to-use web-application, making it widely accessible for researchers without programming skills. We demonstrate the versatility and added value of SynergyLMM through its applications to various experimental setups and treatment experiments with chemo-, targeted- and immunotherapy. These case studies showcase its potential to improve robustness, statistical rigor and consistency of preclinical drug combination results, enabling a faster and safer transition from preclinical to clinical testing.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafael Romero-Becerra & Zhi Zhao & Daniel Nebdal & Elisabeth Müller & Helga Bergholtz & Jens Henrik Norum & Tero Aittokallio, 2025. "Improved analysis of in vivo drug combination experiments with a comprehensive statistical framework and web-tool," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:16:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-025-65218-9
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-65218-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-65218-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-025-65218-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ravi S. Narayan & Piet Molenaar & Jian Teng & Fleur M. G. Cornelissen & Irene Roelofs & Renee Menezes & Rogier Dik & Tonny Lagerweij & Yoran Broersma & Naomi Petersen & Jhon Alexander Marin Soto & Eel, 2020. "A cancer drug atlas enables synergistic targeting of independent drug vulnerabilities," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    2. repec:plo:pbio00:3000411 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Leonard P Freedman & Iain M Cockburn & Timothy S Simcoe, 2015. "The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-9, June.
    4. Eugene Demidenko & Todd W Miller, 2019. "Statistical determination of synergy based on Bliss definition of drugs independence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, November.
    5. Olaf Tellingen & Renee X. Menezes, 2025. "Reanalysis of in vivo drug synergy validation study rules out synergy in most cases," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-5, December.
    6. Carol Kilkenny & William J Browne & Innes C Cuthill & Michael Emerson & Douglas G Altman, 2010. "Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-5, June.
    7. Patricia Jaaks & Elizabeth A. Coker & Daniel J. Vis & Olivia Edwards & Emma F. Carpenter & Simonetta M. Leto & Lisa Dwane & Francesco Sassi & Howard Lightfoot & Syd Barthorpe & Dieudonne Meer & Wanjua, 2022. "Effective drug combinations in breast, colon and pancreatic cancer cells," Nature, Nature, vol. 603(7899), pages 166-173, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:plo:pone00:0215221 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Vivian Leung & Frédérik Rousseau-Blass & Guy Beauchamp & Daniel S J Pang, 2018. "ARRIVE has not ARRIVEd: Support for the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of in vivo Experiments) guidelines does not improve the reporting quality of papers in animal welfare, analgesia or anesthesi," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-13, May.
    3. Gail F Davies & Beth J Greenhough & Pru Hobson-West & Robert G W Kirk & Ken Applebee & Laura C Bellingan & Manuel Berdoy & Henry Buller & Helen J Cassaday & Keith Davies & Daniela Diefenbacher & Tone , 2016. "Developing a Collaborative Agenda for Humanities and Social Scientific Research on Laboratory Animal Science and Welfare," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-12, July.
    4. Yan Li & Xiang Zhou & Rui Chen & Xianyang Zhang & Hongyuan Cao, 2024. "STAREG: Statistical replicability analysis of high throughput experiments with applications to spatial transcriptomic studies," PLOS Genetics, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(10), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Watzinger, Martin & Schnitzer, Monika, 2019. "Standing on the Shoulders of Science," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 215, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    6. Colin F. Camerer & Anna Dreber & Felix Holzmeister & Teck-Hua Ho & Jürgen Huber & Magnus Johannesson & Michael Kirchler & Gideon Nave & Brian A. Nosek & Thomas Pfeiffer & Adam Altmejd & Nick Buttrick , 2018. "Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(9), pages 637-644, September.
    7. Zhongwei Xu & Bingze Xu & Susanna L. Lundström & Àlex Moreno-Giró & Danxia Zhao & Myriam Martin & Erik Lönnblom & Qixing Li & Alexander Krämer & Changrong Ge & Lei Cheng & Bibo Liang & Dongmei Tong & , 2023. "A subset of type-II collagen-binding antibodies prevents experimental arthritis by inhibiting FCGR3 signaling in neutrophils," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Nathalie Percie du Sert & Viki Hurst & Amrita Ahluwalia & Sabina Alam & Marc T Avey & Monya Baker & William J Browne & Alejandra Clark & Innes C Cuthill & Ulrich Dirnagl & Michael Emerson & Paul Garne, 2020. "The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-12, July.
    9. repec:plo:pone00:0240719 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Christopher Tosh & Mauricio Tec & Jessica B. White & Jeffrey F. Quinn & Glorymar Ibanez Sanchez & Paul Calder & Andrew L. Kung & Filemon S. Dela Cruz & Wesley Tansey, 2025. "A Bayesian active learning platform for scalable combination drug screens," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Beverly S Muhlhausler & Frank H Bloomfield & Matthew W Gillman, 2013. "Whole Animal Experiments Should Be More Like Human Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-6, February.
    12. Kiri, Bralind & Lacetera, Nicola & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2018. "Above a swamp: A theory of high-quality scientific production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 827-839.
    13. Constance Holman & Sophie K Piper & Ulrike Grittner & Andreas Antonios Diamantaras & Jonathan Kimmelman & Bob Siegerink & Ulrich Dirnagl, 2016. "Where Have All the Rodents Gone? The Effects of Attrition in Experimental Research on Cancer and Stroke," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, January.
    14. Malika Ihle & Isabel S. Winney & Anna Krystalli & Michael Croucher, 2017. "Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 28(2), pages 348-354.
    15. Bernhard Voelkl & Lucile Vogt & Emily S Sena & Hanno Würbel, 2018. "Reproducibility of preclinical animal research improves with heterogeneity of study samples," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-13, February.
    16. Muradchanian, Jasmine & Hoekstra, Rink & Kiers, Henk & van Ravenzwaaij, Don, 2020. "How Best to Quantify Replication Success? A Simulation Study on the Comparison of Replication Success Metrics," MetaArXiv wvdjf, Center for Open Science.
    17. repec:plo:pbio00:2004879 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Martin Backfisch, 2018. "The Development of Firm Size and Innovativeness in the Pharmaceutical industry between 1989 and 2010," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201813, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    19. Matthias Steinfath & Silvia Vogl & Norman Violet & Franziska Schwarz & Hans Mielke & Thomas Selhorst & Matthias Greiner & Gilbert Schönfelder, 2018. "Simple changes of individual studies can improve the reproducibility of the biomedical scientific process as a whole," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, September.
    20. Christopher Allen & David M A Mehler, 2019. "Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-14, May.
    21. Bertha Estrella & Elena N. Naumova & Magda Cepeda & Trudy Voortman & Peter D. Katsikis & Hemmo A. Drexhage, 2019. "Effects of Air Pollution on Lung Innate Lymphoid Cells: Review of In Vitro and In Vivo Experimental Studies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-15, July.
    22. Emily M Wong & Fern Tablin & Edward S Schelegle, 2020. "Comparison of nonparametric and parametric methods for time-frequency heart rate variability analysis in a rodent model of cardiovascular disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, November.
    23. Olaf Tellingen & Renee X. Menezes, 2025. "Reanalysis of in vivo drug synergy validation study rules out synergy in most cases," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-5, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:16:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-025-65218-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.