Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15033591›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2004

Overview of an interlaboratory collaboration on evaluating the effects of model hepatotoxicants on hepatic gene expression.

Roger G Ulrich, John C Rockett, G Gordon Gibson, Syril D Pettit

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Integrative biological analysis for neuropsychopharmacology.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2014
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Intrinsic disorder in nuclear hormone receptors.Journal of proteome research · 2008
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Guidelines for the routine application of the peptide hits technique.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2005
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Roger G UlrichRosetta Inpharmatics, Merck Research Laboratories, Kirkland, Washington, USA.
John C Rockett
G Gordon Gibson
Syril D Pettit

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA microarrays and related tools offer promise for identification of pathways involved in toxic responses to xenobiotics. To be useful for risk assessment, experimental data must be challenged for reliability and interlaboratory reproducibility. Toward this goal, the Hepatotoxicity Working Group of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) Technical Committee on Application of Genomics to Mechanism-Based Risk Assessment evaluated and compared biological and gene expression responses in rats exposed to two model hepatotoxins--clofibrate and methapyrilene. This collaborative effort provided an unprecedented opportunity for the working group to evaluate and compare multiple biological, genomic, and toxicological parameters across different laboratories and microarray platforms. Many of the results from this collaboration are presented in accompanying articles in this mini-monograph, whereas others have been published previously. (Italic)In vivo(/Italic) studies for both compounds were conducted in two laboratories using a standard experimental protocol, and RNA samples were distributed to 16 laboratories for analysis on six microarray platforms. Histopathology, clinical chemistry, and organ weight changes were consistent with reported effects. Gene expression results demonstrated reasonable agreement between laboratories and across platforms. Discrepancies in expression profiles of some individual genes were largely due to platform differences and approaches to data analysis rather than to biological or interlaboratory variability. Despite these discrepancies there was overall agreement in the biological pathways affected by these compounds, demonstrating that transcriptional profiling is reproducible between laboratories and can reliably identify affected pathways necessary to provide mechanistic insight. This effort represents an important first step toward the use of transcriptional profiling in risk assessment.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisAnimalsAnti-Allergic AgentsClofibrateData CollectionHypolipidemic AgentsLiverMaleMethapyrileneObserver VariationRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyReproducibility of ResultsReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRisk AssessmentAnti-Allergic AgentsClofibrateHypolipidemic AgentsMethapyrilene

Identifiers

PMID15033591
PMCPMC1241895

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.