ArticleNature communications2025
Development of a genetic priority score to predict drug side effects using human genetic evidence.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive Safety in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: Promises, Limits, and the Case for an Enterprise Lifecycle Evidence Ecosystem.Drug safety · 2026Review
- CRISPR-based functional genomic screening in neurodegeneration: mechanistic insights into AD, PD, and ALS.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Review
- Development of a genetic priority score to predict drug side effects using human genetic evidence.Nature communications · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Many drug failures in clinical trials are due to inadequate safety profiles. We developed an in-silico side effect genetic priority score (SE-GPS) that leverages human genetic evidence to inform side effect risk for a given drug target. We construct the SE-GPS in the Open Target dataset using post-marketing side effect data, externally test it in OnSIDES using side effects reported from drug labels and then generate a SE-GPS for 19,422 protein coding genes and 502 phecodes, of which 1.7% had a SE-GPS > 0. To consider drug mechanism, we incorporated the direction of genetic effect into a directional version of the score called the SE-GPS-DOE. We observe that restricting to at least two lines of genetic evidence conferred a 2.3- and 2.5-fold increased risk in side effects in Open Targets and OnSIDES respectively, with increased enrichments in severe drugs. We make all predictions publicly available in a web portal.
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.