Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35337371›Full record

ReviewBiology of sex differences2022

Considerations and challenges for sex-aware drug repurposing.

Jennifer L Fisher, Emma F Jones, Victoria L Flanary, Avery S Williams, Elizabeth J Ramsey, Brittany N Lasseigne

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biology of sex differences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
15.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Toward Sex-Specific Biomaterials Innovation: A Perspective.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jennifer L FisherDepartment of Cell, Developmental and Integrative Biology, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA.
Emma F JonesDepartment of Cell, Developmental and Integrative Biology, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA.
Victoria L FlanaryDepartment of Cell, Developmental and Integrative Biology, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA.
Avery S WilliamsDepartment of Cell, Developmental and Integrative Biology, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA.
Elizabeth J RamseyDepartment of Cell, Developmental and Integrative Biology, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA.
Brittany N LasseigneDepartment of Cell, Developmental and Integrative Biology, Heersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA. bnp0001@uab.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1642-8904
University of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

Using Common Fund data to inform rare disease preclinical models and prioritize drug repurposingR03OD030604 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI LASSEIGNE, BRITTANY NICOLE · 2020 to 2020
$297k
NIH HHS R03 OD030604
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sex differences are essential factors in disease etiology and manifestation in many diseases such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, and neurodegeneration [33]. The biological influence of sex differences (including genomic, epigenetic, hormonal, immunological, and metabolic differences between males and females) and the lack of biomedical studies considering sex differences in their study design has led to several policies. For example, the National Institute of Health's (NIH) sex as a biological variable (SABV) and Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) policies to motivate researchers to consider sex differences [204]. However, drug repurposing, a promising alternative to traditional drug discovery by identifying novel uses for FDA-approved drugs, lacks sex-aware methods that can improve the identification of drugs that have sex-specific responses [7, 11, 14, 33]. Sex-aware drug repurposing methods either select drug candidates that are more efficacious in one sex or deprioritize drug candidates based on if they are predicted to cause a sex-bias adverse event (SBAE), unintended therapeutic effects that are more likely to occur in one sex. Computational drug repurposing methods are encouraging approaches to develop for sex-aware drug repurposing because they can prioritize sex-specific drug candidates or SBAEs at lower cost and time than traditional drug discovery. Sex-aware methods currently exist for clinical, genomic, and transcriptomic information [1, 7, 155]. They have not expanded to other data types, such as DNA variation, which has been beneficial in other drug repurposing methods that do not consider sex [114]. Additionally, some sex-aware methods suffer from poorer performance because a disproportionate number of male and female samples are available to train computational methods [7]. However, there is development potential for several different categories (i.e., data mining, ligand binding predictions, molecular associations, and networks). Low-dimensional representations of molecular association and network approaches are also especially promising candidates for future sex-aware drug repurposing methodologies because they reduce the multiple hypothesis testing burden and capture sex-specific variation better than the other methods [151, 159]. Here we review how sex influences drug response, the current state of drug repurposing including with respect to sex-bias drug response, and how model organism study design choices influence drug repurposing validation.

Indexed as

Drug RepositioningNeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleSex CharacteristicsTranscriptomeComputational drug repurposingDrug repurposingPharmaceuticalsReviewSex-awareSex-biasSex differencesTherapeutics

Identifiers

PMID35337371
PMCPMC8949654
OpenAlexW4221085943

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.