Real and Virtual Clinical Trials: A Formal Analysis
If well-designed, the results of a Randomised Clinical Trial (RCT) can justify a causal claim between treatment and effect in the study population; however, additional information might be needed to carry over this result to another population. RCTs have been criticized exactly on grounds of failing to provide this sort of information (Cartwright and Stegenga, in: Dawid, Twining, Vasilaki (eds) Evidence, inference and enquiry. Oxford University Press, New York, 2011), as well as to black-box important details regarding the mechanisms underpinning the causal law instantiated by the RCT result. On the other side, so-called In Silico Clinical Trials (ISCTs) face the same criticisms addressed against standard modelling and simulation techniques, and cannot be equated to experiments (see, e.g.; Boem and Ratti in: Boniolo, Nathan (eds) Philosophy of molecular medicine: foundational issues in research and practice, Routledge, New York, 2017; Parker in Synthese 169(3):483–496, 2009; Parke in Philos Sci 81(4):516–536, 2014; Diez Roux in Am J Epidemiol 181(2):100–102, 2015 and related discussions in Frigg and Reiss in Synthese 169(3):593–613, 2009; Winsberg in Synthese 169(3):575–592, 2009; Beisbart and Norton in Int Stud Philos Sci 26(4):403–422, 2012). We undertake a formal analysis of both methods in order to identify their distinct contribution to causal inference in the clinical setting. Britton et al.’s study (Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(23):E2098–E2105, 2013) on the impact of ion current variability on cardiac electrophysiology is used for illustrative purposes. We deduce that, by predicting variability through interpolation, ISCTs aid with problems regarding extrapolation of RCTs results, and therefore in assessing their external validity. Furthermore, ISCTs can be said to encode “thick” causal knowledge (knowledge about the biological mechanisms underpinning the causal effects at the clinical level)—as opposed to “thin” difference-making information inferred from RCTs. Hence, ISCTs and RCTs cannot replace one another but rather, they are complementary in that the former provide information about the determinants of variability of causal effects, while the latter can, under certain conditions, establish causality in the first place.
KeywordsRandomised Clinical Trials In Silico Clinical Trials Computational modeling and simulation External validity Extrapolation Interpolation
This study was funded by the European Research Council (Grant Number: GA 639276).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Anjum RL, Mumford S (2012) Causal dispositionalism. In: Bird A, Ellis B, Sankey H (eds) Properties, powers and structure, chap. 7. Routledge, New York, pp 101–118Google Scholar
- Bertolaso M, Ratti E (2018) Conceptual challenges in the theoretical foundations of systems biology. In: Bizzarri M (ed) Systems biology. Springer, Humana Press, New York, pp 1–13Google Scholar
- Bertolaso M, Campaner R (2018) Scientific practice in modelling diseases: stances from cancer research and neuropsychiatry. J Med Philos (forthcoming)Google Scholar
- Bertolaso M, Macleod M (eds) (2016) In silico modeling: the human factor. Humana Mente 30:III–XVGoogle Scholar
- Boem F, Ratti E (2017) Toward a notion of intervention in Big-data biology and molecular medicine. In: Boniolo G, Nathan MJ (eds) Philosophy of molecular medicine: foundational issues in research and practice. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Cartwright N, Stegenga J (2011) A theory of evidence for evidence-based policy, chapter 11. In: Dawid P, Twining W, Vasilaki M (eds) Evidence, inference and enquiry. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 291–322Google Scholar
- Carusi A (2014) Validation and variability: dual challenges on the path from systems biology to systems medicine. Stud Hist Philos Sci C 48:28–37Google Scholar
- Dawid P, Twinning W, Vasilaki M (eds) Evidence, inference and enquiry, chap. 11. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 291–322Google Scholar
- Hoover KD (2008) “Phillips curve.” The concise encyclopedia of economics. Library of economics and liberty. http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PhillipsCurve.html. Accessed 29 Aug 2017
- Keller EF (2003) Making sense of life: explaining biological development with models, metaphors, and machines. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Lewis D (1973a) Counterfactuals. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford (Reprinted with revisions, 1986)Google Scholar
- Mumford S (2009) Causal powers and capacities, chap. 12. In: Beebee H, Hitchcock C, Menzies P (eds) The Oxford handbook of causation. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 265–278Google Scholar
- Osimani B, Poellinger R (forthcoming) A protocol for model validation and causal inference form computer simulation. Stud Hist Philos Sci CGoogle Scholar
- Pearl J (2000) Causality: models, reasoning, and inference, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Poellinger R (forthcoming) On the ramifications of theory choice in causal assessment: indicators of causation and their conceptual relationships. Philos SciGoogle Scholar
- Poellinger R (forthcoming) Analogy-based inference patterns in pharmacological research. In: La Caze A, Osimani B (eds) Uncertainty in pharmacology: epistemology, methods, and decisions. Boston studies in philosophy of science. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Reichenbach H (1956) The direction of time. University of California Press, Berkeley-Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
- Salmon W (1984) Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
- Spirtes P, Glymour C, Scheines R (2000) Causation, prediction, and search, adaptive computation and machine learning. MIT Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
- Wang R-S, Maron BA, Loscalzo J (2015) Systems medicine: evolution of systems biology from bench to bedside. Wiley Interdisc Rev 7(4):141–161Google Scholar
- Winslow RL, Helm P, Baumgartner W, Peddi S, Ratnanather T, McVeigh E, Miller MI (2002) Imaging-based integrative models of the heart: closing the loop between experiment and simulation. In ‘In silico simulation of biological processes: Novartis foundation symposium 247, pp 129–143Google Scholar