ArticleCurrent genomics2012
Challenges and solutions in the development of genomic biomarker panels: a systematic phased approach.
Article in Current genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The evolution of patient-specific precision biomarkers to guide personalized heart-transplant care.Expert review of precision medicine and drug development · 2021Article
- ACTN3 R577X polymorphism and long-term survival in patients with chronic heart failure.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2014Article
- Gene expression profiling of immunomagnetically separated cells directly from stabilized whole blood for multicenter clinical trials.Clinical and translational medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the post-genome era, high throughput gene expression profiling has been successfully used to develop genomic biomarker panels (GBP) that can be integrated into clinical decision making. The development of GBPs in the context of personalized medicine is a scientifically challenging and resource-intense process. It needs to be accomplished in a systematic phased approach to address biological variation related to a clinical phenotype (e.g. disease etiology, gender, etc.) and minimize technical variation (noise). Here we present the methodological aspects of GBP development based on the experience of the Cardiac Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observation (CARGO) study, a study that lead to the development of a molecular classifier for rejection screening in heart transplant patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.