ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2015
In vitro testing for diagnosis of idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions: Implications for pathophysiology.
Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ex vivo Drug Metabolism Using Primary Human Hepatocytes for the Detection of Metabolite-Dependent Antibodies to Red Blood Cells.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2025Article
- Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis: Potential Value of the Lymphocyte Toxicity Assay to Assess Risk.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2023Article
- Bridging the gap between bench and clinic: the importance of understanding the mechanism of iodinated contrast media hypersensitivity.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Carba Analogues of Flupirtine and Retigabine with Improved Oxidation Resistance and Reduced Risk of Quinoid Metabolite Formation.ChemMedChem · 2022Article
- The role ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Paediatric serum sickness-like reaction: A 10-year retrospective cohort study.Paediatrics & child health · 2021Article
- Clinical features, outcomes and treatment in children with drug induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2019Review
- An Updated Review of the Molecular Mechanisms in Drug Hypersensitivity.Journal of immunology research · 2018Review
- In Vitro Assays in Severe Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions: Are They Still Research Tools or Diagnostic Tests Already?International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Article
- Idiosyncratic drug reactions and membranous glomerulopathy.BMJ case reports · 2017Article
- In Vitro Research Tools in the Field of Human Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity and Their Present Use in Small Animal Veterinary Medicine.Veterinary sciences · 2016Review
- Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions: The Pharmacogenomics from Research to Clinical Implementation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Review
- Design and conduct of early phase drug studies in children: challenges and opportunities.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2016Review
- Adverse drug reactions.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Article
- Adverse Drug Reactions in Children: Pediatric Pharmacy and Drug Safety.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAGArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Idiosyncratic drug reactions (IDRs) represent a major health problem, as they are unpredictable, often severe and can be life threatening. The low incidence of IDRs makes their detection during drug development stages very difficult causing many post-marketing drug withdrawals and black box warnings. The fact that IDRs are always not predictable based on the drug's known pharmacology and have no clear dose-effect relationship with the culprit drug renders diagnosis of IDRs very challenging, if not impossible, without the aid of a reliable diagnostic test. The drug provocation test (DPT) is considered the gold standard for diagnosis of IDRs but it is not always safe to perform on patients. In vitro tests have the advantage of bearing no potential harm to patients. However, available in vitro tests are not commonly used clinically because of lack of validation and their complex and expensive procedures. This review discusses the current role of in vitro diagnostic testing for diagnosis of IDRs and gives a brief account of their technical and mechanistic aspects. Advantages, disadvantages and major challenges that prevent these tests from becoming mainstream diagnostic tools are also discussed here.
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.