ArticleBMC bioinformatics2019
COMBImage2: a parallel computational framework for higher-order drug combination analysis that includes automated plate design, matched filter based object counting and temporal data mining.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Charting the Fragmented Landscape of Drug Synergy.Trends in pharmacological sciences · 2020Review
- COMBSecretomics: A pragmatic methodological framework for higher-order drug combination analysis using secretomics.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPharmacological treatment of complex diseases using more than two drugs is commonplace in the clinic due to better efficacy, decreased toxicity and reduced risk for developing resistance. However, many of these higher-order treatments have not undergone any detailed preceding in vitro evaluation that could support their therapeutic potential and reveal disease related insights. Despite the increased medical need for discovery and development of higher-order drug combinations, very few reports from systematic large-scale studies along this direction exist. A major reason is lack of computational tools that enable automated design and analysis of exhaustive drug combination experiments, where all possible subsets among a panel of pre-selected drugs have to be evaluated.
resultsMotivated by this, we developed COMBImage2, a parallel computational framework for higher-order drug combination analysis. COMBImage2 goes far beyond its predecessor COMBImage in many different ways. In particular, it offers automated 384-well plate design, as well as quality control that involves resampling statistics and inter-plate analyses. Moreover, it is equipped with a generic matched filter based object counting method that is currently designed for apoptotic-like cells. Furthermore, apart from higher-order synergy analyses, COMBImage2 introduces a novel data mining approach for identifying interesting temporal response patterns and disentangling higher- from lower- and single-drug effects. COMBImage2 was employed in the context of a small pilot study focused on the CUSP9v4 protocol, which is currently used in the clinic for treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. For the first time, all 246 possible combinations of order 4 or lower of the 9 single drugs consisting the CUSP9v4 cocktail, were evaluated on an in vitro clonal culture of glioma initiating cells.
conclusionsCOMBImage2 is able to automatically design and robustly analyze exhaustive and in general higher-order drug combination experiments. Such a versatile video microscopy oriented framework is likely to enable, guide and accelerate systematic large-scale drug combination studies not only for cancer but also other diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.