ArticleJournal of pharmacogenomics & pharmacoproteomics2012
Omics Screening for Pharmaceutical Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Practice.
Article in Journal of pharmacogenomics & pharmacoproteomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence from a randomized trial that simvastatin, but not ezetimibe, upregulates circulating PCSK9 levels.PloS one · 2013Trial
- Whispers in the Blood: Leveraging MicroRNAs for Unveiling Autologous Blood Doping in Athletes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Hypertension Management: An Ace up Your Sleeve.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- The State of Data Science in Genomic Nursing.Biological research for nursing · 2020Review
- Future Direction for Using Artificial Intelligence to Predict and Manage Hypertension.Current hypertension reports · 2018Review
- Pharmacometabolomics-aided Pharmacogenomics in Autoimmune Disease.EBioMedicine · 2016Review
- Improved drug therapy: triangulating phenomics with genomics and metabolomics.Human genomics · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As molecular techniques have improved, investigators have attempted to improve pharmaceutical efficacy and safety by making trait associations with genomic, epigenomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic polymorphisms. The 'omics era has seen screening assays for pharmaceutical efficacy and safety translated into clinical practice. This manuscript will discuss each 'omic field and the screening assays available to the clinician. While success has been demonstrated in each 'omic field, many challenges remain. Assays need wider availability, predictive values remain low, and costs remain high. In order for clinicians to realize improved efficacy and safety due 'omic screens, development of improved techniques, combining of 'omic assays, and increased clinical utilization is necessary. This is an exciting time for investigators and clinicians that desire improved pharmaceutical therapy.
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.