ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2019
Chemogenetic interactions in human cancer cells.
Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- simCRISPR: Modeling Experimental Complexity in Pooled CRISPR Screens.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Genome-wide profiling identifies the genetic dependencies of cell death following EGFR inhibition.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2026Article
- MEDUSA for Identifying Death Regulatory Genes in Chemo-genetic Profiling Data.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2025Article
- Functional genomic screens with death rate analyses reveal mechanisms of drug action.Nature chemical biology · 2024Article
- The death gaze of MEDUSA.Nature chemical biology · 2024Article
- A scalable platform for efficient CRISPR-Cas9 chemical-genetic screens of DNA damage-inducing compounds.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- p53 controls choice between apoptotic and non-apoptotic death following DNA damage.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Recent Advances in Cancer Drug Discovery Through the Use of Phenotypic Reporter Systems, Connectivity Mapping, and Pooled CRISPR Screening.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
- Common computational tools for analyzing CRISPR screens.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2021Review
- Chemical-Genetic Interactions as a Means to Characterize Drug Synergy.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Review
- Advances in Genomics for Drug Development.Genes · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Chemogenetic profiling enables the identification of genes that enhance or suppress the phenotypic effect of chemical compounds. Using this approach in cancer therapies could improve our ability to predict the response of specific tumor genotypes to chemotherapeutic agents, thus accelerating the development of personalized drug therapy. In the not so distant past, this strategy was only applied in model organisms because there was no feasible technology to thoroughly exploit desired genetic mutations and their impact on drug efficacy in human cells. Today, with the advent of CRISPR gene-editing technology and its application to pooled library screens in mammalian cells, chemogenetic screens are performed directly in human cell lines with high sensitivity and specificity. Chemogenetic profiling provides insights into drug mechanism-of-action, genetic vulnerabilities, and resistance mechanisms, all of which will help to accurately deliver the right drug to the right target in the right patient while minimizing side effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.