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 ρ>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.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2019.09.002 | DOI Listing |
Animals (Basel)
January 2025
School of Biosciences and Veterinary Medicine, University of Camerino, Via Pontoni 5, 62032 Camerino, Italy.
Citizen science activities were performed using sheep as an animal model and involving 252 students aged between 9 and 11 years. The study focused on three pillars: hill/mountain landscape biodiversity, animal welfare and the social utility of research. Two types of tests-"attitude questionnaires" (AQs) and "maximum performance tests" (MPTs)-were administered.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFLGBTQ Fam
June 2024
Division of Adolescent/Young Adult Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, 300 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115.
Few studies have focused on transgender and nonbinary youths' (TNBY) gender development and even less well understood is how family members understand TNBY identity. The current study investigated: a) how TNBY describe their gender identity over time, and b) how family members understand TNBY gender identity over time. The baseline sample included 96 members of 33 families (33 TNBY, 48 cisgender caregivers, 15 siblings) from the United States; 30 families continued after Wave 1.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMJ Evid Based Med
January 2025
Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetic and Maternal Infantile Sciences (DINOGMI), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Objective: To assess the therapeutic quality of exercise interventions delivered in chronic low back pain (cLBP) trials using the international Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise aNd Training (i-CONTENT) tool and its inter-rater agreement.
Methods: We performed a meta-research study, starting from the trials' arms included in the published Cochrane review (2021) 'Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain'. Two pairs of independent reviewers applied the i-CONTENT tool, a standardised tool designed to ensure the quality of exercise therapy intervention, in a random sample of 100 different exercise arms.
Br J Dermatol
January 2025
Department of Dermatology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Background: Generalised pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a chronic, systemic, neutrophilic inflammatory disease. A previous Delphi panel established areas of consensus on GPP, although patient perspectives were not included, and aspects of treatment goals remain unclear.
Objectives: To identify and achieve consensus on refined, specific treatment goals for GPP treatment via a Delphi panel with patient participation.
Braz Oral Res
January 2025
Universidade Estadual de Campinas - Unicamp, Piracicaba Dental School, Department of Health Sciences and Child Dentistry, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
This study aim was to evaluate the need for orthodontic treatment of mixed to permanent dentition using the Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) in a 4-year follow-up. A longitudinal study was conducted with 353 children in the stages from mixed (T1) to permanent (T2) dentition. The need for orthodontic treatment was assessed using the DAI categorized into: DAI 1 (absence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need; DAI ≤ 25); DAI 2 (malocclusion is defined and elective orthodontic treatment is needed; DAI = 26 to 30); DAI 3 (severe malocclusion and a desirable orthodontic treatment need; DAI = 31 to 35) and DAI 4 (severe malocclusion and a mandatory orthodontic treatment need; DAI ≥ 36).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!