ArticleBiometrics2015
A penalized likelihood approach for investigating gene-drug interactions in pharmacogenetic studies.
Article in Biometrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Pharmacogenetics investigates the relationship between heritable genetic variation and the variation in how individuals respond to drug therapies. Often, gene-drug interactions play a primary role in this response, and identifying these effects can aid in the development of individualized treatment regimes. Haplotypes can hold key information in understanding the association between genetic variation and drug response. However, the standard approach for haplotype-based association analysis does not directly address the research questions dictated by individualized medicine. A complementary post-hoc analysis is required, and this post-hoc analysis is usually under powered after adjusting for multiple comparisons and may lead to seemingly contradictory conclusions. In this work, we propose a penalized likelihood approach that is able to overcome the drawbacks of the standard approach and yield the desired personalized output. We demonstrate the utility of our method by applying it to the Scottish Randomized Trial in Ovarian Cancer. We also conducted simulation studies and showed that the proposed penalized method has comparable or more power than the standard approach and maintains low Type I error rates for both binary and quantitative drug responses. The largest performance gains are seen when the haplotype frequency is low, the difference in effect sizes are small, or the true relationship among the drugs is more complex.
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.