Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
Institute
- Medizin (3) (remove)
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in biomedical and clinical settings can disrupt the traditional doctor–patient relationship, which is based on trust and transparency in medical advice and therapeutic decisions. When the diagnosis or selection of a therapy is no longer made solely by the physician, but to a significant extent by a machine using algorithms, decisions become nontransparent. Skill learning is the most common application of machine learning algorithms in clinical decision making. These are a class of very general algorithms (artificial neural networks, classifiers, etc.), which are tuned based on examples to optimize the classification of new, unseen cases. It is pointless to ask for an explanation for a decision. A detailed understanding of the mathematical details of an AI algorithm may be possible for experts in statistics or computer science. However, when it comes to the fate of human beings, this “developer’s explanation” is not sufficient. The concept of explainable AI (XAI) as a solution to this problem is attracting increasing scientific and regulatory interest. This review focuses on the requirement that XAIs must be able to explain in detail the decisions made by the AI to the experts in the field.
The genetic background of pain is becoming increasingly well understood, which opens up possibilities for predicting the individual risk of persistent pain and the use of tailored therapies adapted to the variant pattern of the patient’s pain-relevant genes. The individual variant pattern of pain-relevant genes is accessible via next-generation sequencing, although the analysis of all “pain genes” would be expensive. Here, we report on the development of a cost-effective next generation sequencing-based pain-genotyping assay comprising the development of a customized AmpliSeq™ panel and bioinformatics approaches that condensate the genetic information of pain by identifying the most representative genes. The panel includes 29 key genes that have been shown to cover 70% of the biological functions exerted by a list of 540 so-called “pain genes” derived from transgenic mice experiments. These were supplemented by 43 additional genes that had been independently proposed as relevant for persistent pain. The functional genomics covered by the resulting 72 genes is particularly represented by mitogen-activated protein kinase of extracellular signal-regulated kinase and cytokine production and secretion. The present genotyping assay was established in 61 subjects of Caucasian ethnicity and investigates the functional role of the selected genes in the context of the known genetic architecture of pain without seeking functional associations for pain. The assay identified a total of 691 genetic variants, of which many have reports for a clinical relevance for pain or in another context. The assay is applicable for small to large-scale experimental setups at contemporary genotyping costs.
Interactions of drugs with the classical epigenetic mechanism of DNA methylation or histone modification are increasingly being elucidated mechanistically and used to develop novel classes of epigenetic therapeutics. A data science approach is used to synthesize current knowledge on the pharmacological implications of epigenetic regulation of gene expression. Computer-aided knowledge discovery for epigenetic implications of current approved or investigational drugs was performed by querying information from multiple publicly available gold-standard sources to (i) identify enzymes involved in classical epigenetic processes, (ii) screen original biomedical scientific publications including bibliometric analyses, (iii) identify drugs that interact with epigenetic enzymes, including their additional non-epigenetic targets, and (iv) analyze computational functional genomics of drugs with epigenetic interactions. PubMed database search yielded 3051 hits on epigenetics and drugs, starting in 1992 and peaking in 2016. Annual citations increased to a plateau in 2000 and show a downward trend since 2008. Approved and investigational drugs in the DrugBank database included 122 compounds that interacted with 68 unique epigenetic enzymes. Additional molecular functions modulated by these drugs included other enzyme interactions, whereas modulation of ion channels or G-protein-coupled receptors were underrepresented. Epigenetic interactions included (i) drug-induced modulation of DNA methylation, (ii) drug-induced modulation of histone conformations, and (iii) epigenetic modulation of drug effects by interference with pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. Interactions of epigenetic molecular functions and drugs are mutual. Recent research activities on the discovery and development of novel epigenetic therapeutics have passed successfully, whereas epigenetic effects of non-epigenetic drugs or epigenetically induced changes in the targets of common drugs have not yet received the necessary systematic attention in the context of pharmacological plasticity.