Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35685365›Full record

ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2022

Systematic review of computational methods for drug combination prediction.

Weikaixin Kong, Gianmarco Midena, Yingjia Chen, Paschalis Athanasiadis, Tianduanyi Wang, Juho Rousu, Liye He, Tero Aittokallio

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Knowledge Graph Approach To Discovering Drug Combination Therapies Across The Phenome.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Scaling up drug combination surface prediction.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Weikaixin KongInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Finland.
Gianmarco MidenaHelsinki Institute for Information Technology (HIIT), Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Finland.
Yingjia ChenInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Finland.
Paschalis AthanasiadisInstitute for Cancer Research, Department of Cancer Genetics, Oslo University Hospital, Norway.
Tianduanyi WangInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Finland.
Juho RousuHelsinki Institute for Information Technology (HIIT), Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Finland.
Liye HeInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Finland.
Tero AittokallioInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synergistic effects between drugs are rare and highly context-dependent and patient-specific. Hence, there is a need to develop novel approaches to stratify patients for optimal therapy regimens, especially in the context of personalized design of combinatorial treatments. Computational methods enable systematic

Indexed as

CancerDose–response assayDrug combinationsLiterature reviewSelective effectSynergistic effectViral infection

Identifiers

PMID35685365
PMCPMC9168078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.