Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36318539›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

A novel application of neural networks to identify potentially effective combinations of biologic factors for enhancement of bone fusion/repair.

Albert T Anastasio, Bailey S Zinger, Thomas J Anastasio

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Albert T AnastasioDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5817-3826
Bailey S ZingerChemical and Biological Engineering Department, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, United States of America.
Thomas J AnastasioDepartment of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, United States of America.
Duke Medical Center · USUniversity of Colorado Boulder · USUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe use of biologic adjuvants (orthobiologics) is becoming commonplace in orthopaedic surgery. Among other applications, biologics are often added to enhance fusion rates in spinal surgery and to promote bone healing in complex fracture patterns. Generally, orthopaedic surgeons use only one biomolecular agent (ie allograft with embedded bone morphogenic protein-2) rather than several agents acting in concert. Bone fusion, however, is a highly multifactorial process and it likely could be more effectively enhanced using biologic factors in combination, acting synergistically. We used artificial neural networks, trained via machine learning on experimental data on orthobiologic interventions and their outcomes, to identify combinations of orthobiologic factors that potentially would be more effective than single agents. This use of machine learning applied to orthobiologic interventions is unprecedented.

methodsAvailable data on the outcomes associated with various orthopaedic biologic agents, electrical stimulation, and pulsed ultrasound were curated from the literature and assembled into a form suitable for machine learning. The best among many different types of neural networks was chosen for its ability to generalize over this dataset, and that network was used to make predictions concerning the expected efficacy of 2400 medically feasible combinations of 9 different agents and treatments.

resultsThe most effective combinations were high in the bone-morphogenic proteins (BMP) 2 and 7 (BMP2, 15mg; BMP7, 5mg), and in osteogenin (150ug). In some of the most effective combinations, electrical stimulation could substitute for osteogenin. Some other effective combinations also included bone marrow aspirate concentrate. BMP2 and BMP7 appear to have the strongest pairwise linkage of the factors analyzed in this study.

conclusionsArtificial neural networks are powerful forms of artificial intelligence that can be applied readily in the orthopaedic domain, but neural network predictions improve along with the amount of data available to train them. This study provides a starting point from which networks trained on future, expanded datasets can be developed. Yet even this initial model makes specific predictions concerning potentially effective combinatorial therapeutics that should be verified experimentally. Furthermore, our analysis provides an avenue for further research into the basic science of bone healing by demonstrating agents that appear to be linked in function.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceFractures, BoneBone Morphogenetic Protein 3HumansMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerBone Morphogenetic Protein 3

Identifiers

PMID36318539
PMCPMC9624421
OpenAlexW4307800249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.