{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05234460196292257, 'fraction_numerical': 0.024536532170119956, 'mean_word_length': 4.919354838709677, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Forecasting Accuracy of the Hollow Fiber Model of Tuberculosis for Clinical Therapeutic Outcomes.

BACKGROUND
The hollow fiber system model of tuberculosis (HFS-TB), in tandem with Monte Carlo experiments, represents a drug development tool (DDT) with the potential for use to develop tuberculosis treatment regimens. However, the predictive accuracy of the HFS-TB, or any other nonclinical DDT such as an animal model, has yet to be robustly evaluated.


METHODS
To avoid hindsight bias, a literature search was performed to identify clinical studies published at least 6 months after HFS-TB experiments' quantitative predictions. Steps to minimize bias and for reporting systematic reviews were applied as outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Publications were scored for quality of evidence. Accuracy was calculated using the mean absolute percentage error, then summated with weighting assigned by sample size and quality-of-evidence score. Given the lack of a gold-standard tuberculosis DDT, the forecasting accuracy of a completely unreliable tool was also calculated from 1000 simulated experiments for a random or "total guesswork" model.


RESULTS
The quantitative forecasting accuracy (95% confidence interval [CI]) for the "total guesswork" model was 15.6% (95% CI, 8.7%-22.5%); bias was -0.1% (95% CI, -2.5% to 2.2%). Twenty clinical studies were published after HFS-TB experiments predicted optimal drug exposures and doses, susceptibility breakpoints, and optimal combination regimens. Based on these clinical studies, the predictive accuracy of the HFS-TB was 94.4% (95% CI, 84.3%-99.9%), and bias was 1.8% (95% CI, -13.7% to 6.2%).


CONCLUSIONS
The HFS-TB model is highly accurate at forecasting optimal drug exposures, doses, and dosing schedules for use in the clinic.