Prevention of adverse drug effects: a pharmacogenomic approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a serious burden and can negatively impact patient quality of life. One of these ADRs, anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (ACT), occurs in up to 65% of treated patients and can lead to congestive heart failure. Pharmacogenetic studies have helped to reveal the mechanisms of ACT and, consequently, inform current strategies to prevent ACT in the clinic. RECENT FINDINGS: Many pharmacogenetic studies have been conducted for ACT, but few have led to the development of clinical practice guidelines and clinical genetic testing for ACT. This is, in part, because of lack of replication in independent patient cohorts and/or validation of an affected biological pathway. Recent advances in pharmacogenetic studies have been made through the use of novel methods that directly implicate dysregulated genes and perturbed biological pathways in response to anthracycline treatment. SUMMARY: Furthering the understanding of the genetics and altered biological pathways of ACT through these novel methods can inform clinical treatment strategies and enable refinement of current clinical practice guidelines. This can therefore lead to improvement in clinical pharmacogenetic testing for further reduction of the incidence of ACT in pediatric cancer patients taking anthracyclines.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".