Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25573145›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2014

Computational identification of multi-omic correlates of anticancer therapeutic response.

Lindsay C Stetson, Taylor Pearl, Yanwen Chen, Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. MoNETA: MultiOmics Network Embedding for SubType Analysis.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Recent advances in drug repurposing using machine learning.Current opinion in chemical biology · 2021
    Review
  13. Machine learning in the prediction of cancer therapy.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lindsay C Stetson
Taylor Pearl
Yanwen Chen
Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan
Case Western Reserve University · USCase Comprehensive Cancer CenterMassachusetts Institute of Technology · US

Funding

TUMOR METABOLISM PROGRAMP30CA043703 · NCI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI Drew James Adams · 1987 to 2026
$142.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA043703
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA challenge in precision medicine is the transformation of genomic data into knowledge that can be used to stratify patients into treatment groups based on predicted clinical response. Although clinical trials remain the only way to truly measure drug toxicities and effectiveness, as a scientific community we lack the resources to clinically assess all drugs presently under development. Therefore, an effective preclinical model system that enables prediction of anticancer drug response could significantly speed the broader adoption of personalized medicine.

resultsThree large-scale pharmacogenomic studies have screened anticancer compounds in greater than 1000 distinct human cancer cell lines. We combined these datasets to generate and validate multi-omic predictors of drug response. We compared drug response signatures built using a penalized linear regression model and two non-linear machine learning techniques, random forest and support vector machine. The precision and robustness of each drug response signature was assessed using cross-validation across three independent datasets. Fifteen drugs were common among the datasets. We validated prediction signatures for eleven out of fifteen tested drugs (17-AAG, AZD0530, AZD6244, Erlotinib, Lapatinib, Nultin-3, Paclitaxel, PD0325901, PD0332991, PF02341066, and PLX4720).

conclusionsMulti-omic predictors of drug response can be generated and validated for many drugs. Specifically, the random forest algorithm generated more precise and robust prediction signatures when compared to support vector machines and the more commonly used elastic net regression. The resulting drug response signatures can be used to stratify patients into treatment groups based on their individual tumor biology, with two major benefits: speeding the process of bringing preclinical drugs to market, and the repurposing and repositioning of existing anticancer therapies.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyAlgorithmsAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsCell Line, TumorDatasets as TopicDrug Screening Assays, AntitumorHumansModels, BiologicalPredictive Value of TestsAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID25573145
PMCPMC4243102
OpenAlexW2010773093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.