PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Applying synergy metrics to combination screening data: Agreements, disagreements and pitfalls.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Vlot, A.H.C.* ; Aniceto, N.* ; Menden, M.P. ; Ulrich-Merzenich, G.* ; Bender, A.*

Applying synergy metrics to combination screening data: Agreements, disagreements and pitfalls.

Drug Discov. Today 24, 2286-2298 (2019)

Postprint

DOI

	Open Access Green

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

Synergistic drug combinations are commonly sought to overcome monotherapy resistance in cancer treatment. To identify such combinations, high-throughput cancer cell line combination screens are performed; and synergy is quantified using competing models based on fundamentally different assumptions. Here, we compare the behaviour of four synergy models, namely Loewe additivity, Bliss independence, highest single agent and zero interaction potency, using the Merck oncology combination screen. We evaluate agreements and disagreements between the models and investigate putative artefacts of each model's assumptions. Despite at least moderate concordance between scores (Pearson's r >0.32, Spearman's rho > 0.34), multiple instances of strong disagreement were observed. Those disagreements are driven by, among others, large differences in tested concentrations, maximum response values and median effective concentrations.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Web of Science
Times Cited

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

6.880

1.923