Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37996540›Full record

ReviewNature protocols2024

Robust scoring of selective drug responses for patient-tailored therapy selection.

Yingjia Chen, Liye He, Aleksandr Ianevski, Pilar Ayuda-Durán, Swapnil Potdar, Jani Saarela, Juho J Miettinen, Sari Kytölä, Susanna Miettinen, Mikko Manninen and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Protein Profiles Predict Treatment Responses to the PI3K Inhibitor Umbralisib in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

14 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Yingjia ChenInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Liye HeInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-6632-2112
Aleksandr IanevskiInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Pilar Ayuda-DuránDepartment of Molecular Cell Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-9799-3680
Swapnil PotdarInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Jani SaarelaInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7306-7175
Juho J MiettinenInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-3987-1693
Sari KytöläDepartment of Hematology, Helsinki University Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki, Finland.
Susanna MiettinenAdult Stem Cell Group, Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0647-9556
Mikko ManninenOrton Orthopaedic Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Caroline A HeckmanInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Jorrit M EnserinkDepartment of Molecular Cell Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Krister WennerbergBiotech Research and Innovation Centre (BRIC), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tero AittokallioInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. tero.aittokallio@helsinki.fi.ORCID 0000-0002-0886-9769
University of Helsinki · FIOslo University Hospital · NOHelsinki University Hospital · FIInvalidisäätiö · FITampere University · FIUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 310507Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 312413Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 313267Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 320185Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 326238Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 326588Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 334781Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 336666Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 340141Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 344698Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 345803Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) 353177EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020) 101057442Kreftforeningen (Norwegian Cancer Society) 182524Kreftforeningen (Norwegian Cancer Society) 208012Ministry of Health and Care Services | Helse Sør-Øst RHF (Southern and Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority) 2017064Ministry of Health and Care Services | Helse Sør-Øst RHF (Southern and Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority) 2018012Ministry of Health and Care Services | Helse Sør-Øst RHF (Southern and Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority) 2019096Ministry of Health and Care Services | Helse Sør-Øst RHF (Southern and Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority) 2020026NordForsk 96782Norges Forskningsråd (Research Council of Norway) 262652
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most patients with advanced malignancies are treated with severely toxic, first-line chemotherapies. Personalized treatment strategies have led to improved patient outcomes and could replace one-size-fits-all therapies, yet they need to be tailored by testing of a range of targeted drugs in primary patient cells. Most functional precision medicine studies use simple drug-response metrics, which cannot quantify the selective effects of drugs (i.e., the differential responses of cancer cells and normal cells). We developed a computational method for selective drug-sensitivity scoring (DSS), which enables normalization of the individual patient's responses against normal cell responses. The selective response scoring uses the inhibition of noncancerous cells as a proxy for potential drug toxicity, which can in turn be used to identify effective and safer treatment options. Here, we explain how to apply the selective DSS calculation for guiding precision medicine in patients with leukemia treated across three cancer centers in Europe and the USA; the generic methods are also widely applicable to other malignancies that are amenable to drug testing. The open-source and extendable R-codes provide a robust means to tailor personalized treatment strategies on the basis of increasingly available ex vivo drug-testing data from patients in real-world and clinical trial settings. We also make available drug-response profiles to 527 anticancer compounds tested in 10 healthy bone marrow samples as reference data for selective scoring and de-prioritization of drugs that show broadly toxic effects. The procedure takes <60 min and requires basic skills in R.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNeoplasmsHumansPrecision MedicineAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID37996540
OpenAlexW4388942764

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.