Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32461840›Full record

ArticleACS sustainable chemistry & engineering2018

Channel Interactions and Robust Inference for Ratiometric β-lactamase Assay Data: a Tox21 Library Analysis.

Fjodor Melnikov, Jui-Hua Hsieh, Nisha S Sipes, Paul T Anastas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS sustainable chemistry & engineering, 2018. 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

4 authors.

Fjodor MelnikovSchool of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, United States.
Jui-Hua HsiehKelly Government Solutions, 111 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, United States.
Nisha S SipesNational Toxicology Program / National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), 111 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, United States.
Paul T AnastasSchool of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, United States.

Funding

EPA FP917793
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ratiometric β-lactamase (BLA) reporters are widely used to study transcriptional responses in a high-throughput screening (HTS) format. Typically, a ratio readout (background/target fluorescence) is used for toxicity assessment and structure-activity modeling efforts from BLA HTS data. This ratio readout may be confounded by channel-specific artifacts. To maximize the utility of BLA HTS data, we analyzed the relationship between individual channels and ratio readouts after fitting 10,000 chemical titration series screened in seven BLA stress-response assays from the Tox21 initiative. Similar to previous observations, we found that activity classifications based on BLA ratio readout alone are confounded by interference patterns for up to 85% (50 % on average) of active chemicals. Most Tox21 analyses adjust for this issue by evaluating target and ratio readout direction. In addition, we found that the potency and efficacy estimates derived from the ratio readouts may not represent the target channel effects and thus complicates chemical activity comparison. From these analyses we recommend a simpler approach using a direct evaluation of the target and background channels as well as the respective noise levels when using BLA data for toxicity assessment. This approach eliminates the channel interference issues and allows for straightforward chemical assessment and comparisons.

Indexed as

concentration-responsein vitroqHTSTox21β-lactamase

Identifiers

PMID32461840
PMCPMC7252516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.