Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26650062›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2016

Advances in the Pharmacogenomics of Adverse Drug Reactions.

Susannah L Collins, Daniel F Carr, Munir Pirmohamed

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Genophenotypic Factors and Pharmacogenomics in Adverse Drug Reactions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Incidental pharmacogenetics findings in an HLA-related research: Considerations for primary prevention.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Pharmacogenomics and drug therapy.Australian prescriber · 2018
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

3 authors.

Susannah L CollinsDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Daniel F CarrDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Munir PirmohamedDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. munirp@liv.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0700654Medical Research Council MR/L006758/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid developments in pharmacogenomics have been noticeable in recent years, and much of this knowledge has improved understanding of adverse drug reactions. This improved knowledge has largely been the result of improved sequencing technologies and falling costs in this area, as well as improved statistical techniques to analyse the data derived from studies. While the genetic reasons behind adverse drug reactions are becoming better understood, translation of this knowledge, particularly in terms of biomarkers that might be clinically applicable at the bedside, has been more difficult. Understanding of the technologies and their application is limited among practising clinicians. The cost of some of the technologies available may also be prohibitive in stretched healthcare economies. As education about the potential for applying pharmacogenomics improves and costs fall, understanding of adverse drug reactions and application of this knowledge in a clinical setting should improve.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBiomedical TechnologyData Interpretation, StatisticalDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansPharmacogeneticsPoint-of-Care SystemsBiomarkers

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.