Trial reportPloS one2021
A survival of the fittest strategy for the selection of genotypes by which drug responders and non-responders can be predicted in small groups.
Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Phenotype Prediction Scores (PPS) might be powerful tools to predict traits or the efficacy of treatments based on combinations of Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNPs) in large samples. We developed a novel method to produce PPS models for small samples sizes. The set of SNPs is first filtered on those known to be relevant in biological pathways involved in a clinical condition, and then further filtered repeatedly in a survival strategy to select stabile positive/negative risk alleles. This method is applied on Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder (FSIAD), for which two subtypes has been proposed: 1) a relatively insensitive excitatory system in the brain for sexual cues, and 2) a dysfunctional activation of brain mechanisms for sexual inhibition. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled cross-over experiment was conducted on 129 women with FSIAD. The women received three different on-demand drug-combination treatments during 3 two-week periods: testosterone (0.5 mg) + sildenafil (50 mg), testosterone (0.5 mg) + buspirone (10 mg), or matching placebos. The resulted PPS were independently validated on patient-level and group-level. The AUC scores for T+S of the derivation set was 0.867 (95% CI = 0.796-0.939; p<0.001) and was 0.890 (95% CI = 0.778-1.000; p<0.001) on the validation set. For T+B the AUC of the derivation set was 0.957 (95% CI = 0.921-0.992; p<0.001) and 0.869 (95% CI = 0.746-0.992; p<0.001) for the validation set. Both formulas could reliably predict for each drug who benefit from the on-demand drugs and could therefore be useful in clinical practice.
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.