↓ Skip to main content

Cancer biomarker discovery is improved by accounting for variability in general levels of drug sensitivity in pre-clinical models

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cancer biomarker discovery is improved by accounting for variability in general levels of drug sensitivity in pre-clinical models
Published in
Genome Biology, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13059-016-1050-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Geeleher, Nancy J. Cox, R. Stephanie Huang

Abstract

We show that variability in general levels of drug sensitivity in pre-clinical cancer models confounds biomarker discovery. However, using a very large panel of cell lines, each treated with many drugs, we could estimate a general level of sensitivity to all drugs in each cell line. By conditioning on this variable, biomarkers were identified that were more likely to be effective in clinical trials than those identified using a conventional uncorrected approach. We find that differences in general levels of drug sensitivity are driven by biologically relevant processes. We developed a gene expression based method that can be used to correct for this confounder in future studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 34%
Researcher 15 22%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 24%
Computer Science 9 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 13 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 February 2017.
All research outputs
#2,631,945
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,093
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,395
of 328,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#32
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.