Lisa Bastarache1, Jacob J Hughey1, Jeffrey A Goldstein2, Julie A Bastraache3,4,5, Satya Das3, Neil Charles Zaki6, Chenjie Zeng3, Leigh Anne Tang1, Dan M Roden1,3,7, Joshua C Denny1,3. 1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 4. Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 5. Department Pathology, Microbiology & Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 7. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Phenotype Risk Score (PheRS) is a method to detect Mendelian disease patterns using phenotypes from the electronic health record (EHR). We compared the performance of different approaches mapping EHR phenotypes to Mendelian disease features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PheRS utilizes Mendelian diseases descriptions annotated with Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) terms. In previous work, we presented a map linking phecodes (based on International Classification of Diseases [ICD]-Ninth Revision) to HPO terms. For this study, we integrated ICD-Tenth Revision codes and lab data. We also created a new map between HPO terms using customized groupings of ICD codes. We compared the performance with cases and controls for 16 Mendelian diseases using 2.5 million de-identified medical records. RESULTS: PheRS effectively distinguished cases from controls for all 15 positive controls and all approaches tested (P < 4 × 1016). Adding lab data led to a statistically significant improvement for 4 of 14 diseases. The custom ICD groupings improved specificity, leading to an average 8% increase for precision at 100 (-2% to 22%). Eight of 10 adults with cystic fibrosis tested had PheRS in the 95th percentile prio to diagnosis. DISCUSSION: Both phecodes and custom ICD groupings were able to detect differences between affected cases and controls at the population level. The ICD map showed better precision for the highest scoring individuals. Adding lab data improved performance at detecting population-level differences. CONCLUSIONS: PheRS is a scalable method to study Mendelian disease at the population level using electronic health record data and can potentially be used to find patients with undiagnosed Mendelian disease.
OBJECTIVE: The Phenotype Risk Score (PheRS) is a method to detect Mendelian disease patterns using phenotypes from the electronic health record (EHR). We compared the performance of different approaches mapping EHR phenotypes to Mendelian disease features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PheRS utilizes Mendelian diseases descriptions annotated with Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) terms. In previous work, we presented a map linking phecodes (based on International Classification of Diseases [ICD]-Ninth Revision) to HPO terms. For this study, we integrated ICD-Tenth Revision codes and lab data. We also created a new map between HPO terms using customized groupings of ICD codes. We compared the performance with cases and controls for 16 Mendelian diseases using 2.5 million de-identified medical records. RESULTS: PheRS effectively distinguished cases from controls for all 15 positive controls and all approaches tested (P < 4 × 1016). Adding lab data led to a statistically significant improvement for 4 of 14 diseases. The custom ICD groupings improved specificity, leading to an average 8% increase for precision at 100 (-2% to 22%). Eight of 10 adults with cystic fibrosis tested had PheRS in the 95th percentile prio to diagnosis. DISCUSSION: Both phecodes and custom ICD groupings were able to detect differences between affected cases and controls at the population level. The ICD map showed better precision for the highest scoring individuals. Adding lab data improved performance at detecting population-level differences. CONCLUSIONS: PheRS is a scalable method to study Mendelian disease at the population level using electronic health record data and can potentially be used to find patients with undiagnosed Mendelian disease.
Authors: D M Roden; J M Pulley; M A Basford; G R Bernard; E W Clayton; J R Balser; D R Masys Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2008-05-21 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Pedro L Teixeira; Wei-Qi Wei; Robert M Cronin; Huan Mo; Jacob P VanHouten; Robert J Carroll; Eric LaRose; Lisa A Bastarache; S Trent Rosenbloom; Todd L Edwards; Dan M Roden; Thomas A Lasko; Richard A Dart; Anne M Nikolai; Peggy L Peissig; Joshua C Denny Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2016-08-07 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Ioana Danciu; James D Cowan; Melissa Basford; Xiaoming Wang; Alexander Saip; Susan Osgood; Jana Shirey-Rice; Jacqueline Kirby; Paul A Harris Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2014-02-14 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Kimberly Splinter; David R Adams; Carlos A Bacino; Hugo J Bellen; Jonathan A Bernstein; Alys M Cheatle-Jarvela; Christine M Eng; Cecilia Esteves; William A Gahl; Rizwan Hamid; Howard J Jacob; Bijal Kikani; David M Koeller; Isaac S Kohane; Brendan H Lee; Joseph Loscalzo; Xi Luo; Alexa T McCray; Thomas O Metz; John J Mulvihill; Stanley F Nelson; Christina G S Palmer; John A Phillips; Leslie Pick; John H Postlethwait; Chloe Reuter; Vandana Shashi; David A Sweetser; Cynthia J Tifft; Nicole M Walley; Michael F Wangler; Monte Westerfield; Matthew T Wheeler; Anastasia L Wise; Elizabeth A Worthey; Shinya Yamamoto; Euan A Ashley Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Cole A Deisseroth; Johannes Birgmeier; Ethan E Bodle; Jennefer N Kohler; Dena R Matalon; Yelena Nazarenko; Casie A Genetti; Catherine A Brownstein; Klaus Schmitz-Abe; Kelly Schoch; Heidi Cope; Rebecca Signer; Julian A Martinez-Agosto; Vandana Shashi; Alan H Beggs; Matthew T Wheeler; Jonathan A Bernstein; Gill Bejerano Journal: Genet Med Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Emily E Groopman; Maddalena Marasa; Sophia Cameron-Christie; Slavé Petrovski; Vimla S Aggarwal; Hila Milo-Rasouly; Yifu Li; Junying Zhang; Jordan Nestor; Priya Krithivasan; Wan Yee Lam; Adele Mitrotti; Stacy Piva; Byum H Kil; Debanjana Chatterjee; Rachel Reingold; Drew Bradbury; Michael DiVecchia; Holly Snyder; Xueru Mu; Karla Mehl; Olivia Balderes; David A Fasel; Chunhua Weng; Jai Radhakrishnan; Pietro Canetta; Gerald B Appel; Andrew S Bomback; Wooin Ahn; Natalie S Uy; Shumyle Alam; David J Cohen; Russell J Crew; Geoffrey K Dube; Maya K Rao; Sitharthan Kamalakaran; Brett Copeland; Zhong Ren; Joshua Bridgers; Colin D Malone; Caroline M Mebane; Neha Dagaonkar; Bengt C Fellström; Carolina Haefliger; Sumit Mohan; Simone Sanna-Cherchi; Krzysztof Kiryluk; Jan Fleckner; Ruth March; Adam Platt; David B Goldstein; Ali G Gharavi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-12-26 Impact factor: 176.079
Authors: Dana C Crawford; David R Crosslin; Gerard Tromp; Iftikhar J Kullo; Helena Kuivaniemi; M Geoffrey Hayes; Joshua C Denny; William S Bush; Jonathan L Haines; Dan M Roden; Catherine A McCarty; Gail P Jarvik; Marylyn D Ritchie Journal: Front Genet Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: Chenjie Zeng; Lisa A Bastarache; Ran Tao; Eric Venner; Scott Hebbring; Justin D Andujar; Sarah T Bland; David R Crosslin; Siddharth Pratap; Ayorinde Cooley; Jennifer A Pacheco; Kurt D Christensen; Emma Perez; Carrie L Blout Zawatsky; Leora Witkowski; Hana Zouk; Chunhua Weng; Kathleen A Leppig; Patrick M A Sleiman; Hakon Hakonarson; Marc S Williams; Yuan Luo; Gail P Jarvik; Robert C Green; Wendy K Chung; Ali G Gharavi; Niall J Lennon; Heidi L Rehm; Richard A Gibbs; Josh F Peterson; Dan M Roden; Georgia L Wiesner; Joshua C Denny Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 33.006
Authors: William B Weeks; Grace Huynh; Stacey Y Cao; Jeremy Smith; Chaitanya Bangur; James N Weinstein Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 5.128