Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26776183›Full record

ArticlePacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing2016

INTEGRATING CLINICAL LABORATORY MEASURES AND ICD-9 CODE DIAGNOSES IN PHENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDIES.

Anurag Verma, Joseph B Leader, Shefali S Verma, Alex Frase, John Wallace, Scott Dudek, Daniel R Lavage, Cristopher V Van Hout, Frederick E Dewey, John Penn and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Informatics and machine learning to define the phenotype.Expert review of molecular diagnostics · 2018
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anurag VermaBiomedical and Translational Informatics, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA, USA3Center for Systems Genomics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Joseph B Leader
Shefali S Verma
Alex Frase
John Wallace
Scott Dudek
Daniel R Lavage
Cristopher V Van Hout
Frederick E Dewey
John Penn
Alex Lopez
John D Overton
David J Carey
David H Ledbetter
H Lester Kirchner
Marylyn D Ritchie
Sarah A Pendergrass
Geisinger Health System · USPennsylvania State University · USRegeneron (United States) · US

Funding

OMOP information model for eMERGE phenotypingU01HG008679 · NHGRI · GEISINGER CLINIC · PI WILLIAMS, MARC S. · 2015 to 2019
$4.4M
NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008679
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic health records (EHR) provide a comprehensive resource for discovery, allowing unprecedented exploration of the impact of genetic architecture on health and disease. The data of EHRs also allow for exploration of the complex interactions between health measures across health and disease. The discoveries arising from EHR based research provide important information for the identification of genetic variation for clinical decision-making. Due to the breadth of information collected within the EHR, a challenge for discovery using EHR based data is the development of high-throughput tools that expose important areas of further research, from genetic variants to phenotypes. Phenome-Wide Association studies (PheWAS) provide a way to explore the association between genetic variants and comprehensive phenotypic measurements, generating new hypotheses and also exposing the complex relationships between genetic architecture and outcomes, including pleiotropy. EHR based PheWAS have mainly evaluated associations with case/control status from International Classification of Disease, Ninth Edition (ICD-9) codes. While these studies have highlighted discovery through PheWAS, the rich resource of clinical lab measures collected within the EHR can be better utilized for high-throughput PheWAS analyses and discovery. To better use these resources and enrich PheWAS association results we have developed a sound methodology for extracting a wide range of clinical lab measures from EHR data. We have extracted a first set of 21 clinical lab measures from the de-identified EHR of participants of the Geisinger MyCodeTM biorepository, and calculated the median of these lab measures for 12,039 subjects. Next we evaluated the association between these 21 clinical lab median values and 635,525 genetic variants, performing a genome-wide association study (GWAS) for each of 21 clinical lab measures. We then calculated the association between SNPs from these GWAS passing our Bonferroni defined p-value cutoff and 165 ICD-9 codes. Through the GWAS we found a series of results replicating known associations, and also some potentially novel associations with less studied clinical lab measures. We found the majority of the PheWAS ICD-9 diagnoses highly related to the clinical lab measures associated with same SNPs. Moving forward, we will be evaluating further phenotypes and expanding the methodology for successful extraction of clinical lab measurements for research and PheWAS use. These developments are important for expanding the PheWAS approach for improved EHR based discovery.

Indexed as

PhenotypeAlgorithmsClinical Laboratory Information SystemsComputational BiologyElectronic Health RecordsGenetic Association StudiesGenetic VariationGenome-Wide Association StudyGenotypeHumansInternational Classification of DiseasesPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSystems Integration

Identifiers

PMID26776183
PMCPMC4718547
OpenAlexW2312365340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.