Cited by 79Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and ProtectionComputational Drug Discovery MethodsAnimal testing and alternatives

Data mining reveals a network of early-response genes as a consensus signature of drug-induced in vitro and in vivo toxicity

Open access
Zhang, J D, Berntenis, N, Roth, A, Ebeling, M·2014·The Pharmacogenomics Journal

Abstract

Gene signatures of drug-induced toxicity are of broad interest, but they are often identified from small-scale, single-time point experiments, and are therefore of limited applicability. To address this issue, we performed multivariate analysis of gene expression, cell-based assays, and histopathological data in the TG-GATEs (Toxicogenomics Project-Genomics Assisted Toxicity Evaluation system) database. Data mining highlights four genes-EGR1, ATF3, GDF15 and FGF21-that are induced 2 h after drug administration in human and rat primary hepatocytes poised to eventually undergo cytotoxicity-induced cell death. Modelling and simulation reveals that these early stress-response genes form a functional network with evolutionarily conserved structure and intrinsic dynamics. This is underlined by the fact that early induction of this network in vivo predicts drug-induced liver and kidney pathology with high accuracy. Our findings demonstrate the value of early gene-expression signatures in predicting and understanding compound-induced toxicity. The identified network can empower first-line tests that reduce animal use and costs of safety evaluation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/tpj.2013.39

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, J. D., Berntenis, N., Roth, A., & Ebeling, M.
Affiliations
F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG (CH)
Corresponding author
  • Zhang, J D
  • Ebeling, M
Venue
The Pharmacogenomics Journal
Published
2013-11-12
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
208-216
ISSN
  • 1470-269X (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-1150
OpenAlex
W2005132453
Cited by
79
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5
FWCI
9.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Pharmacogenomics Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and Protection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
Keywords
drug toxicity, early response genes, gene expression signatures, hepatotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, EGR1, ATF3, GDF15, FGF21, primary hepatocytes, histopathology, animal-free toxicity testing, predictive biomarkers
MeSH terms
Humans, Genes, Immediate-Early, Toxicity Tests, Gene Expression Profiling, Data Mining, In Vitro Techniques

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review