Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27876057›Full record

ReviewJournal of translational medicine2016

Bridging the gap between clinicians and systems biologists: from network biology to translational biomedical research.

Natini Jinawath, Sacarin Bunbanjerdsuk, Maneerat Chayanupatkul, Nuttapong Ngamphaiboon, Nithi Asavapanumas, Jisnuson Svasti, Varodom Charoensawan

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of translational medicine, 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. How could metabolomics change pediatric health?Italian journal of pediatrics · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Natini JinawathIntegrative Computational BioScience (ICBS) Center, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand.
Sacarin BunbanjerdsukProgram in Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Maneerat ChayanupatkulDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nuttapong NgamphaiboonMedical Oncology Unit, Department of Medicine Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nithi AsavapanumasDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Science, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Jisnuson SvastiIntegrative Computational BioScience (ICBS) Center, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand.
Varodom CharoensawanIntegrative Computational BioScience (ICBS) Center, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand. varodom.cha@mahidol.ac.th.ORCID 0000-0002-2199-4126
Mahidol University · THChulalongkorn University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the wealth of data accumulated from completely sequenced genomes and other high-throughput experiments, global studies of biological systems, by simultaneously investigating multiple biological entities (e.g. genes, transcripts, proteins), has become a routine. Network representation is frequently used to capture the presence of these molecules as well as their relationship. Network biology has been widely used in molecular biology and genetics, where several network properties have been shown to be functionally important. Here, we discuss how such methodology can be useful to translational biomedical research, where scientists traditionally focus on one or a small set of genes, diseases, and drug candidates at any one time. We first give an overview of network representation frequently used in biology: what nodes and edges represent, and review its application in preclinical research to date. Using cancer as an example, we review how network biology can facilitate system-wide approaches to identify targeted small molecule inhibitors. These types of inhibitors have the potential to be more specific, resulting in high efficacy treatments with less side effects, compared to the conventional treatments such as chemotherapy. Global analysis may provide better insight into the overall picture of human diseases, as well as identify previously overlooked problems, leading to rapid advances in medicine. From the clinicians' point of view, it is necessary to bridge the gap between theoretical network biology and practical biomedical research, in order to improve the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of the world's major diseases.

Indexed as

PhysiciansSystems BiologyTranslational Research, BiomedicalHumansNeoplasmsPrecision MedicineWorkforceBiomedical researchCancersNetwork biologyPersonalized therapySystems biology

Identifiers

PMID27876057
PMCPMC5120462
OpenAlexW2550010984

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.