Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34326325›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

MuSyC is a consensus framework that unifies multi-drug synergy metrics for combinatorial drug discovery.

David J Wooten, Christian T Meyer, Alexander L R Lubbock, Vito Quaranta, Carlos F Lopez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Systems Biology of the Cancer Cell.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2025
    Review

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

David J Wooten *Department of Physics, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Christian T Meyer *Program in Chemical and Physical Biology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.
Alexander L R LubbockDepartment of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Nashville, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6950-8908
Vito QuarantaDepartment of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Nashville, Nashville, TN, USA. vito.quaranta@vanderbilt.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7491-8672
Carlos F LopezDepartment of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Nashville, Nashville, TN, USA. c.lopez@vanderbilt.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-3668-7468
Vanderbilt University · USPennsylvania State University · US

Funding

Single-Cell Biology and Data Analysis Shared Resource (SCB-DA SR)U54CA217450 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI WEAVER, ALISSA M · 2018 to 2022
$8.5M
Integrated Training in Engineering and DiabetesT32DK101003 · NIDDK · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Jamey D. Young · 2014 to 2026
$3.9M
Phenotype Transitions in Small Cell Lung CancerU01CA215845 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI LOPEZ, CARLOS FEDERICO, QUARANTA, VITO · 2017 to 2021
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA215845NCI NIH HHS U54 CA217450NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK101003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug combination discovery depends on reliable synergy metrics but no consensus exists on the correct synergy criterion to characterize combined interactions. The fragmented state of the field confounds analysis, impedes reproducibility, and delays clinical translation of potential combination treatments. Here we present a mass-action based formalism to quantify synergy. With this formalism, we clarify the relationship between the dominant drug synergy principles, and present a mapping of commonly used frameworks onto a unified synergy landscape. From this, we show how biases emerge due to intrinsic assumptions which hinder their broad applicability and impact the interpretation of synergy in discovery efforts. Specifically, we describe how traditional metrics mask consequential synergistic interactions, and contain biases dependent on the Hill-slope and maximal effect of single-drugs. We show how these biases systematically impact synergy classification in large combination screens, potentially misleading discovery efforts. Thus the proposed formalism can provide a consistent, unbiased interpretation of drug synergy, and accelerate the translatability of synergy studies.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDrug DiscoveryConsensusDrug CombinationsDrug SynergismGuidelines as TopicHumansModels, TheoreticalSoftwareDrug Combinations

Identifiers

PMID34326325
PMCPMC8322415
OpenAlexW3183139760

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.