Table 2.
Differences in predictive power for TQT study results when varying in silico models (a) and validation data (b)
| Concentration range | O’Hara | TenTusscher-06 | Grandi |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | |||
| At TQT conc. | 62% | 50% | 59% |
| 10-fold TQT conc. | 76% | 71% | 68% |
| 100-fold TQT conc. | 88% | 79% | 71% |
| Concentration range | Q-Patch | Manual and Q-Patch |
|---|---|---|
| (b) | ||
| At TQT conc. | 62% | 71% |
| 10-fold TQT conc. | 76% | 91% |
| 100-fold TQT conc. | 88% | 91% |
Data adapted, with permission, from [58].