Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20300088›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2010

Genome-wide association studies in pharmacogenomics.

Ann K Daly

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
111citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

111 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Candidate gene studies of a promising intermediate phenotype: failure to replicate.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2013
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Polygenic risk scores in pharmacogenomics: methodological challenges, current applications, and perspectives for clinical implementation.Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Associations between thePharmaceutics · 2022
    Article

51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Ann K DalyInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH, UK. a.k.daly@ncl.ac.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association (GWA) studies for pharmacogenomics-related traits are increasingly being performed to identify loci that affect either drug response or susceptibility to adverse drug reactions. Until now, only the largest effects have been detected, partly because of the challenges of obtaining large numbers of cases for pharmacogenomic studies. Since 2007, a range of pharmacogenomics GWA studies have been published that have identified several interesting and novel associations between drug responses or reactions and clinically relevant loci, showing the value of this approach.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsAryl Hydrocarbon HydroxylasesChemical and Drug Induced Liver InjuryCytochrome P-450 CYP2C9Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFloxacillinGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansInterferon-alphaMixed Function OxygenasesMuscular DiseasesPharmacogeneticsPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsSimvastatinVitamin K Epoxide ReductasesAnticoagulantsAryl Hydrocarbon HydroxylasesCYP2C9 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP2C9FloxacillinInterferon-alphaMixed Function OxygenasesPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsSimvastatinVitamin K Epoxide Reductases

Identifiers

PMID20300088

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.