↓ Skip to main content

Literature Based Drug Interaction Prediction with Clinical Assessment Using Electronic Medical Records: Novel Myopathy Associated Drug Interactions

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Literature Based Drug Interaction Prediction with Clinical Assessment Using Electronic Medical Records: Novel Myopathy Associated Drug Interactions
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002614
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jon D. Duke, Xu Han, Zhiping Wang, Abhinita Subhadarshini, Shreyas D. Karnik, Xiaochun Li, Stephen D. Hall, Yan Jin, J. Thomas Callaghan, Marcus J. Overhage, David A. Flockhart, R. Matthew Strother, Sara K. Quinney, Lang Li

Abstract

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are a common cause of adverse drug events. In this paper, we combined a literature discovery approach with analysis of a large electronic medical record database method to predict and evaluate novel DDIs. We predicted an initial set of 13197 potential DDIs based on substrates and inhibitors of cytochrome P450 (CYP) metabolism enzymes identified from published in vitro pharmacology experiments. Using a clinical repository of over 800,000 patients, we narrowed this theoretical set of DDIs to 3670 drug pairs actually taken by patients. Finally, we sought to identify novel combinations that synergistically increased the risk of myopathy. Five pairs were identified with their p-values less than 1E-06: loratadine and simvastatin (relative risk or RR = 1.69); loratadine and alprazolam (RR = 1.86); loratadine and duloxetine (RR = 1.94); loratadine and ropinirole (RR = 3.21); and promethazine and tegaserod (RR = 3.00). When taken together, each drug pair showed a significantly increased risk of myopathy when compared to the expected additive myopathy risk from taking either of the drugs alone. Based on additional literature data on in vitro drug metabolism and inhibition potency, loratadine and simvastatin and tegaserod and promethazine were predicted to have a strong DDI through the CYP3A4 and CYP2D6 enzymes, respectively. This new translational biomedical informatics approach supports not only detection of new clinically significant DDI signals, but also evaluation of their potential molecular mechanisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 3%
Spain 2 2%
Canada 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Unknown 104 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 21%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 5%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 21 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 18%
Computer Science 15 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 7%
Engineering 6 5%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 29 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 March 2019.
All research outputs
#16,063,069
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#6,970
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,474
of 185,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#74
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,964 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 185,010 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.