Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29112189›Full record

ArticleScientific data2017

Quantification of sensitivity and resistance of breast cancer cell lines to anti-cancer drugs using GR metrics.

Marc Hafner, Laura M Heiser, Elizabeth H Williams, Mario Niepel, Nicholas J Wang, James E Korkola, Joe W Gray, Peter K Sorger

Open access · goldAbstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A renaissance in targeting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2026
    Review
  4. Pan-cancer ex vivo target evaluation of phosphodiesterase 3 A (PDE3A).Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. PROX1 is an early driver of lineage plasticity in prostate cancer.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. PI3K inhibitors are finally coming of age.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2021
    Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marc HafnerHMS LINCS Center, Laboratory of Systems Pharmacology, Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115 USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1337-7598
Laura M HeiserMEP LINCS Center, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Oregon Center for Spatial Systems Biomedicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239 USA.
Elizabeth H WilliamsHMS LINCS Center, Laboratory of Systems Pharmacology, Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4665-1875
Mario NiepelHMS LINCS Center, Laboratory of Systems Pharmacology, Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115 USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1415-6295
Nicholas J WangMEP LINCS Center, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Oregon Center for Spatial Systems Biomedicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239 USA.
James E KorkolaMEP LINCS Center, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Oregon Center for Spatial Systems Biomedicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239 USA.
Joe W GrayMEP LINCS Center, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Oregon Center for Spatial Systems Biomedicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239 USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9225-6756
Peter K SorgerHMS LINCS Center, Laboratory of Systems Pharmacology, Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115 USA.
Harvard University · USOregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

Systems-Based Predictions of Responses to Cancer TherapyU54CA112970 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIF-LAWRENC BERKELEY LAB · PI MILLS, GORDON B. · 2004 to 2014
$27.1M
Pharmaco Response Signatures and Disease MechanismU54HL127365 · NHLBI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI SORGER, PETER KARL · 2014 to 2019
$13.1M
OutreachU54HG008100 · NHGRI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI GRAY, JOE W., GRAY, JOE W. · 2014 to 2019
$10.5M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA112970NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG008100NHLBI NIH HHS U54 HL127365
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional means for scoring the effects of anti-cancer drugs on the growth and survival of cell lines is based on relative cell number in drug-treated and control samples and is seriously confounded by unequal division rates arising from natural biological variation and differences in culture conditions. This problem can be overcome by computing drug sensitivity on a per-division basis. The normalized growth rate inhibition (GR) approach yields per-division metrics for drug potency (GR

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsBreast NeoplasmsCell Line, TumorDrug Resistance, NeoplasmDrug Screening Assays, AntitumorFemaleHumansAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID29112189
PMCPMC5674849
OpenAlexW2767216042

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.