↓ Skip to main content

Transcriptional Profiling of the Dose Response: A More Powerful Approach for Characterizing Drug Activities

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, September 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
citeulike
8 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Transcriptional Profiling of the Dose Response: A More Powerful Approach for Characterizing Drug Activities
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, September 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000512
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rui-Ru Ji, Heshani de Silva, Yisheng Jin, Robert E. Bruccoleri, Jian Cao, Aiqing He, Wenjun Huang, Paul S. Kayne, Isaac M. Neuhaus, Karl-Heinz Ott, Becky Penhallow, Mark I. Cockett, Michael G. Neubauer, Nathan O. Siemers, Petra Ross-Macdonald

Abstract

The dose response curve is the gold standard for measuring the effect of a drug treatment, but is rarely used in genomic scale transcriptional profiling due to perceived obstacles of cost and analysis. One barrier to examining transcriptional dose responses is that existing methods for microarray data analysis can identify patterns, but provide no quantitative pharmacological information. We developed analytical methods that identify transcripts responsive to dose, calculate classical pharmacological parameters such as the EC50, and enable an in-depth analysis of coordinated dose-dependent treatment effects. The approach was applied to a transcriptional profiling study that evaluated four kinase inhibitors (imatinib, nilotinib, dasatinib and PD0325901) across a six-logarithm dose range, using 12 arrays per compound. The transcript responses proved a powerful means to characterize and compare the compounds: the distribution of EC50 values for the transcriptome was linked to specific targets, dose-dependent effects on cellular processes were identified using automated pathway analysis, and a connection was seen between EC50s in standard cellular assays and transcriptional EC50s. Our approach greatly enriches the information that can be obtained from standard transcriptional profiling technology. Moreover, these methods are automated, robust to non-optimized assays, and could be applied to other sources of quantitative data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 6%
Bulgaria 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
India 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 71 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 17%
Professor 6 7%
Student > Master 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 16 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 10%
Computer Science 5 6%
Chemistry 3 4%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 16 20%
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 05 October 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#7,480
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,217
of 106,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#43
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 106,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.