Pharmacogenomic associations of adverse drug reactions in asthma: systematic review and research prioritisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A systematic review of pharmacogenomic studies capturing adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to asthma medications was undertaken, and a survey of Pharmacogenomics in Childhood Asthma (PiCA) consortia members was conducted. Studies were eligible if genetic polymorphisms were compared with suspected ADR(s) in a patient with asthma, as either a primary or secondary outcome. Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The ADRs and polymorphisms identified were change in lung function tests (rs1042713), adrenal suppression (rs591118), and decreased bone mineral density (rs6461639) and accretion (rs9896933, rs2074439). Two of these polymorphisms were replicated within the paper, but none had external replication. Priorities from PiCA consortia members (representing 15 institution in eight countries) for future studies were tachycardia (SABA/LABA), adrenal suppression/crisis and growth suppression (corticosteroids), sleep/behaviour disturbances (leukotriene receptor antagonists), and nausea and vomiting (theophylline). Future pharmacogenomic studies in asthma should collect relevant ADR data as well as markers of efficacy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".