Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32121160›Full record

ArticleGenes2020

Computational Cancer Cell Models to Guide Precision Breast Cancer Medicine.

Lijun Cheng, Abhishek Majumdar, Daniel Stover, Shaofeng Wu, Yaoqin Lu, Lang Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

6 authors.

Lijun ChengDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Abhishek MajumdarDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Daniel StoverDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Shaofeng WuDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Yaoqin LuDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, XinJiang Medical University, Urumqi 830011, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China.
Lang LiDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

Funding

National Institute of Health Research Foundation 1U54HD090215-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLarge-scale screening of drug sensitivity on cancer cell models can mimic in vivo cellular behavior providing wider scope for biological research on cancer. Since the therapeutic effect of a single drug or drug combination depends on the individual patient's genome characteristics and cancer cells integration reaction, the identification of an effective agent in an in vitro model by using large number of cancer cell models is a promising approach for the development of targeted treatments. Precision cancer medicine is to select the most appropriate treatment or treatments for an individual patient. However, it still lacks the tools to bridge the gap between conventional in vitro cancer cell models and clinical patient response to inhibitors.

methodsAn optimal two-layer decision system model is developed to identify the cancer cells that most closely resemble an individual tumor for optimum therapeutic interventions in precision cancer medicine. Accordingly, an optimal grid parameters selection is designed to seek the highest accordance for treatment selection to the patient's preference for drug response and in vitro cancer cell drug screening. The optimal two-layer decision system model overcomes the challenge of heterology data comparison between the tumor and the cancer cells, as well as between the continual variation of drug responses in vitro and the discrete ones in clinical practice. We simulated the model accuracy using 681 cancer cells' mRNA and associated 481 drug screenings and validated our results on 315 breast cancer patients drug selection across seven drugs (docetaxel, doxorubicin, fluorouracil, paclitaxel, tamoxifen, cyclophosphamide, lapitinib).

resultsComparing with the real response of a drug in clinical patients, the novel model obtained an overall average accordance over 90.8% across the seven drugs. At the same time, the optimal cancer cells and the associated optimal therapeutic efficacy of cancer drugs are recommended. The novel optimal two-layer decision system model was used on 1097 patients with breast cancer in guiding precision medicine for a recommendation of their optimal cancer cells (30 cancer cells) and associated efficacy of certain cancer drugs. Our model can detect the most similar cancer cells for each individual patient.

conclusionA successful clinical translation model (optimal two-layer decision system model) was developed to bridge in-vitro basic science to clinical practice in a therapeutic intervention application for the first time. The novel tool kills two birds with one stone. It can help basic science to seek optimal cancer cell models for an individual tumor, while prioritizing clinical drugs' recommendations in practice. Tool associated platform website: We extended the breast cancer research to 32 more types of cancers across 45 therapy predictions. The website is set up and can be accessed by the link: https://pcm2019.shinyapps.io/drug_response_prediction/.

Indexed as

Drug Evaluation, PreclinicalPrecision MedicineBreast NeoplasmsCell Line, TumorComputer SimulationCyclophosphamideDocetaxelDoxorubicinFemaleFluorouracilGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansPaclitaxelTamoxifenTranscriptomeCyclophosphamideDocetaxelDoxorubicinFluorouracilPaclitaxelTamoxifencancer cellsdrug recommendationprecision cancer medicine

Identifiers

PMID32121160
PMCPMC7140855

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.