ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
Personalizing chemotherapy drug selection using a novel transcriptomic chemogram.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prognostic value and early response stratification of a multi-biomarker panel in cervical cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Gene signatures predictive of chemotherapeutic response have the potential to extend the reach of precision medicine by allowing oncologists to optimize treatment for individuals. Most published predictive signatures are only capable of predicting response for individual drugs, but most chemotherapy regimens utilize combinations of different agents. We propose a unified framework, called the chemogram, that uses predictive signatures to rank the relative predicted sensitivity of different drugs for individual tumors. Using this approach, providers could efficiently screen against many therapeutics to optimize chemotherapy at any time, whether it be for a treatment-naive tumor or a chemo-resistant tumor requiring a new treatment strategy. To demonstrate the utility of the chemogram, we used predictive signatures (extracted from a previously established method) in our framework to rank predicted sensitivity among drugs within cell lines. We then compared the rank order of predicted and observed response against each drug. Across most cancer types, chemogram-generated predictions were more accurate than predictions made by randomly generated gene signatures, signatures extracted from differential expression alone, and was comparable to another established method of drug response prediction. Our framework demonstrates the ability of transcriptomic signatures to not only predict chemotherapeutic response, but also correctly assign rankings of drug sensitivity on an individual basis. Additionally, scaling the chemogram to include more drugs does not compromise accuracy.
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.