Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32780246›Full record

ArticleCell biology and toxicology2020

Drug efficacy and toxicity prediction: an innovative application of transcriptomic data.

Xuhua Xia

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell biology and toxicology, 2020. 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
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xuhua XiaDepartment of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada. xxia@uottawa.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-3092-7566
University of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug toxicity and efficacy are difficult to predict partly because they are both poorly defined, which I aim to remedy here from a transcriptomic perspective. There are two major categories of drugs: (1) restorative drugs aiming to restore an abnormal cell, tissue, or organ to normal function (e.g., restoring normal membrane function of epithelial cells in cystic fibrosis), and (2) disruptive drugs aiming to kill pathogens or malignant cells. These two types of drugs require different definition of efficacy and toxicity. I outlined rationales for defining transcriptomic efficacy and toxicity and illustrated numerically their application with two sets of transcriptomic data, one for restorative drugs (treating cystic fibrosis with lumacaftor/ivacaftor aiming to restore the cellular function of epithelial cells) and the other for disruptive drugs (treating acute myeloid leukemia with prexasertib). The conceptual framework presented will help and sensitize researchers to collect data required for determining drug toxicity.

Indexed as

Drug DevelopmentGene Expression ProfilingToxicity TestsAminophenolsAminopyridinesAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsBenzodioxolesCell DeathCystic FibrosisDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug CombinationsEpithelial CellsGene Regulatory NetworksHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteAminophenolsAminopyridinesAntineoplastic AgentsBenzodioxolesDrug Combinationslumacaftor, ivacaftor drug combinationprexasertibPyrazinesPyrazolesQuinolonesAcute myeloid leukemiaCystic fibrosisDrug developmentToxicity predictionTranscriptomeTranscriptomic efficacyTranscriptomic toxicity

Identifiers

PMID32780246
PMCPMC7661398
OpenAlexW3048804961

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.