Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26225234›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2015

A New Drug Combinatory Effect Prediction Algorithm on the Cancer Cell Based on Gene Expression and Dose-Response Curve.

C Pankaj Goswami, L Cheng, P S Alexander, A Singal, L Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. FDA-approved disulfiram as a novel treatment for aggressive leukemia.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Anticancer drug synergy prediction in understudied tissues using transfer learning.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  15. Machine learning in the prediction of cancer therapy.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021
    Review
  16. A Review of CurrentFrontiers in oncology · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

C Pankaj GoswamiMolecular Lab, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
L ChengCenters for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, School of Medicine, Indiana University Indianapolis, Indiana, USA ; Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine, Indiana University Indianapolis, Indiana, USA ; State Key Laboratory of Oncogenes and Related Genes, Shanghai Cancer Institute Shanghai, China.
P S AlexanderCenters for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, School of Medicine, Indiana University Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
A SingalCenters for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, School of Medicine, Indiana University Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
L LiCenters for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, School of Medicine, Indiana University Indianapolis, Indiana, USA ; Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine, Indiana University Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.

Funding

Predicting Drug Resistance in Cancer Genomes by DMA Methylation ProfilingU54CA113001 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI HUANG, TIM H.-M. · 2004 to 2014
$16.1M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA113001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene expression data before and after treatment with an individual drug and the IC20 of dose-response data were utilized to predict two drugs' interaction effects on a diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) cancer cell. A novel drug interaction scoring algorithm was developed to account for either synergistic or antagonistic effects between drug combinations. Different core gene selection schemes were investigated, which included the whole gene set, the drug-sensitive gene set, the drug-sensitive minus drug-resistant gene set, and the known drug target gene set. The prediction scores were compared with the observed drug interaction data at 6, 12, and 24 hours with a probability concordance (PC) index. The test result shows the concordance between observed and predicted drug interaction ranking reaches a PC index of 0.605. The scoring reliability and efficiency was further confirmed in five drug interaction studies published in the GEO database.

Identifiers

PMID26225234
PMCPMC4360667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.