↓ Skip to main content

A Computational Systems Biology Approach for Identifying Candidate Drugs for Repositioning for Cardiovascular Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
A Computational Systems Biology Approach for Identifying Candidate Drugs for Repositioning for Cardiovascular Disease
Published in
Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12539-016-0194-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alvin Z. Yu, Stephen A. Ramsey

Abstract

We report an in silico method to screen for receptors or pathways that could be targeted to elicit beneficial transcriptional changes in a cellular model of a disease of interest. In our method, we integrate: (1) a dataset of transcriptome responses of a cell line to a panel of drugs; (2) two sets of genes for the disease; and (3) mappings between drugs and the receptors or pathways that they target. We carried out a gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) test for each of the two gene sets against a list of genes ordered by fold-change in response to a drug in a relevant cell line (HL60), with the overall score for a drug being the difference of the two enrichment scores. Next, we applied GSEA for drug targets based on drugs that have been ranked by their differential enrichment scores. The method ranks drugs by the degree of anti-correlation of their gene-level transcriptional effects on the cell line with the genes in the disease gene sets. We applied the method to data from (1) CMap 2.0; (2) gene sets from two transcriptome profiling studies of atherosclerosis; and (3) a combined dataset of drug/target information. Our analysis recapitulated known targets related to CVD (e.g., PPARγ; HMG-CoA reductase, HDACs) and novel targets (e.g., amine oxidase A, δ-opioid receptor). We conclude that combining disease-associated gene sets, drug-transcriptome-responses datasets and drug-target annotations can potentially be useful as a screening tool for diseases that lack an accepted cellular model for in vitro screening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Researcher 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Computer Science 2 12%
Mathematics 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 8 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 October 2018.
All research outputs
#15,390,684
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences
#111
of 295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,122
of 313,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 295 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 313,854 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.