ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
PKIDB-informed molecular profiling improves reproducible prediction of cancer kinase-inhibitor response.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Protein kinase inhibitors are central drugs in precision oncology, but cell-line response to these agents is affected by lineage and molecular context rather than target identity alone. Many drug-response models report optimistic internal performance; stricter evaluation requires held-out drugs, independent screens and cross-platform validation. This study evaluates a focused, auditable pharmacogenomic modelling framework for kinase-inhibitor response prediction. Methods: Protein kinase inhibitors were curated from PKIDB and matched to GDSC release 8.5 response data and DepMap 26Q1 molecular profiles. The full matched screens contained GDSC2 (40,403 drug-cell line pairs; 42 drugs; 945 models), GDSC1 (40,900 pairs; 48 drugs; 945 models) and PRISM secondary screen data (7,090 pairs; 23 drugs; 336 models). GDSC2-to-GDSC1 external testing was restricted to compounds shared by both GDSC releases (23,340 GDSC2 training pairs and 22,570 GDSC1 test pairs; 25 drugs). Models were evaluated using cell-line cross-validation, drug cross-validation, independent-screen validation, continuous-response prediction and pathway/drug subgroup analysis. Results: In the GDSC1 shared-drug external set, molecular-summary models achieved ROC AUC 0.706 for GDSC AUC-defined sensitivity and 0.692 for LN_IC50-defined sensitivity. Continuous-response validation in the same GDSC1 test set produced Spearman correlations of 0.453 for AUC and 0.457 for LN_IC50, with continuous-derived sensitivity ROC AUCs of 0.703 and 0.710. Molecular summaries improved external ROC AUC over drug-lineage context by 0.052 for AUC sensitivity and 0.046 for LN_IC50 sensitivity. ERK/MAPK signalling showed the strongest pathway-level signal, with ROC AUC 0.825 for AUC sensitivity and 0.780 for LN_IC50 sensitivity. PRISM cross-platform validation was more modest (best ROC AUC 0.597), consistent with assay and drug-overlap differences. Conclusion: PKIDB-informed molecular profiling improves externally reproducible kinase-inhibitor response modelling across public cancer cell-line screens, especially for ERK/MAPK inhibitors. These findings support a pharmacogenomic modelling and validation study rather than direct patient-level or experimental validation.
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.