SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Credibility of genetic predictors for antiepileptic drug resistance: A systematic Bayesian reappraisal of published meta-analyses.
Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Credibility of genetic predictors for antiepileptic drug resistance: A systematic Bayesian reappraisal of published meta-analyses.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- The evolving landscape of pharmacogenomics: Current achievements and future directions.Pharmacological reviews · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We systematically reappraised meta-analyses of pharmacogenetic studies to evaluate the credibility of association between gene polymorphisms and resistance to anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs). A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Library and OpenGrey up to April 2025. The methodological quality of the included systematic meta-analyses was evaluated with the AMSTAR-2 tool, and the credibility of the genetic comparison results was determined by the Venice criteria and two Bayesian analytic approaches, false positive reporting probability (FPRP), and Bayesian false discovery probability (BFDP). Of the 33 studies identified, 32 were systematic meta-analyses, all of which were rated as critically low quality by AMSTAR-2. Our reassessment indicated seven single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of four genes-ABCB1 (rs1045642, rs2032582), ABCC2 (rs717620, rs3740066), GABRG2 (rs211037) and SCN1A (rs2298771, rs10167228)-which could be regarded as potential determinants of response to AED. Among these, only ABCB1 rs2032582 (G vs. A and GG vs. GA + AA) was found to be noteworthy in Caucasian epilepsy patients under FPRP or BFDP at the pre-specified probability level of 0.001. However, the application of the Venice criteria to such relationships identified as weak the strength of the cumulative evidence for epidemiological relationship because of a potential publication bias. Our findings, illustrating the poor yield of genetic predictors from meta-analyses of candidate gene studies, underscore the need for large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and subsequent replication studies for identification of robust predictors of resistance to AEDs.
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.