Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27757060›Full record

ArticleDialogues in clinical neuroscience2016

Omics approaches to individual variation: modeling networks and the virtual patient.

Hans Lehrach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Hans LehrachMax Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics (MPIMG), Berlin, Germany; Dahlem Centre for Genome Research and Medical Systems Biology (DCGMS), Berlin, Germany; French National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), US13, Paris, France; Alacris Theranostics GmbH, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Every human is unique. We differ in our genomes, environment, behavior, disease history, and past and current medical treatment-a complex catalog of differences that often leads to variations in the way each of us responds to a particular therapy. We argue here that true personalization of drug therapies will rely on "virtual patient" models based on a detailed characterization of the individual patient by molecular, imaging, and sensor techniques. The models will be based, wherever possible, on the molecular mechanisms of disease processes and drug action but can also expand to hybrid models including statistics/machine learning/artificial intelligence-based elements trained on available data to address therapeutic areas or therapies for which insufficient information on mechanisms is available. Depending on the disease, its mechanisms, and the therapy, virtual patient models can be implemented at a fairly high level of abstraction, with molecular models representing cells, cell types, or organs relevant to the clinical question, interacting not only with each other but also the environment. In the future, "virtual patient/in-silico self" models may not only become a central element of our health care system, reducing otherwise unavoidable mistakes and unnecessary costs, but also act as "guardian angels" accompanying us through life to protect us against dangers and to help us to deal intelligently with our own health and wellness.

Indexed as

GenomicsModels, GeneticPrecision MedicineComputer SimulationHumanscancerdrug responsemechanistic modelnext-generation sequencingpatient modelvirtual clinical trial

Identifiers

PMID27757060
PMCPMC5067143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.