Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25349306›Full record

ArticleMolecular cancer therapeutics2014

Cancer in silico drug discovery: a systems biology tool for identifying candidate drugs to target specific molecular tumor subtypes.

F Anthony San Lucas, Jerry Fowler, Kyle Chang, Scott Kopetz, Eduardo Vilar, Paul Scheet

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular cancer therapeutics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

F Anthony San LucasThe Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Jerry FowlerDepartment of Epidemiology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Kyle ChangThe Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Scott KopetzThe Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Eduardo VilarThe Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Department of Clinical Cancer Prevention, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. pscheet@alum.wustl.edu EVilar@mdanderson.org.
Paul ScheetThe Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. pscheet@alum.wustl.edu EVilar@mdanderson.org.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Integrative Pipeline for Analysis & Translational Application of TCGA Data (GDAC)U24CA143883 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI AKBANI, REHAN, MILLS, GORDON B. · 2009 to 2016
$10.6M
PAARK4Kids-Pharmacogenomics of Anticancer Agents Research in ChildrenU01GM092666 · NIGMS · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI RELLING, MARY V · 2010 to 2014
$8.9M
Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences (CCTS)KL2TR000370 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI MCPHERSON, DAVID D · 2012 to 2016
$4.3M
Statistical Methods for Population Genomics and "Next-gen" Sequencing DataR01HG005859 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI SCHEET, PAUL A · 2011 to 2015
$1.9M
Stress Signaling Pathways and Resistance in Colorectal CancerR01CA172670 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI KOPETZ, SCOTT · 2013 to 2017
$1.6M
Discovering New Targets for Chemoprevention in Familial Adenomatous PolyposisR03CA176788 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI VILAR SANCHEZ, EDUARDO · 2014 to 2015
$160k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000370NCI NIH HHS 1R01CA172670-01NCI NIH HHS 1R03CA176788-01A1NCI NIH HHS R01 CA172670NCI NIH HHS R03 CA176788NCI NIH HHS U24 CA143883NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG005859NHGRI NIH HHS R01HG005859NIGMS NIH HHS U01 GM092666NIGMS NIH HHS U01 GM92666
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large-scale cancer datasets such as The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) allow researchers to profile tumors based on a wide range of clinical and molecular characteristics. Subsequently, TCGA-derived gene expression profiles can be analyzed with the Connectivity Map (CMap) to find candidate drugs to target tumors with specific clinical phenotypes or molecular characteristics. This represents a powerful computational approach for candidate drug identification, but due to the complexity of TCGA and technology differences between CMap and TCGA experiments, such analyses are challenging to conduct and reproduce. We present Cancer in silico Drug Discovery (CiDD; scheet.org/software), a computational drug discovery platform that addresses these challenges. CiDD integrates data from TCGA, CMap, and Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) to perform computational drug discovery experiments, generating hypotheses for the following three general problems: (i) determining whether specific clinical phenotypes or molecular characteristics are associated with unique gene expression signatures; (ii) finding candidate drugs to repress these expression signatures; and (iii) identifying cell lines that resemble the tumors being studied for subsequent in vitro experiments. The primary input to CiDD is a clinical or molecular characteristic. The output is a biologically annotated list of candidate drugs and a list of cell lines for in vitro experimentation. We applied CiDD to identify candidate drugs to treat colorectal cancers harboring mutations in BRAF. CiDD identified EGFR and proteasome inhibitors, while proposing five cell lines for in vitro testing. CiDD facilitates phenotype-driven, systematic drug discovery based on clinical and molecular data from TCGA.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryGene Expression ProfilingAntineoplastic AgentsCell Line, TumorCluster AnalysisComputational BiologyComputer SimulationDatasets as TopicHumansMutationNeoplasmsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareSystems BiologyWorkflowAntineoplastic AgentsBRAF protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf

Identifiers

PMID25349306
PMCPMC4341901
OpenAlexW2160992134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.