| Literature DB >> 36153474 |
Xiaoxia Wen1,2, Ping Leng2, Jiasi Wang3, Guishu Yang1, Ruiling Zu1, Xiaojiong Jia4, Kaijiong Zhang1, Birga Anteneh Mengesha5, Jian Huang6, Dongsheng Wang7, Huaichao Luo8,9.
Abstract
The recent global focus on big data in medicine has been associated with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in diagnosis and decision-making following recent advances in computer technology. Up to now, AI has been applied to various aspects of medicine, including disease diagnosis, surveillance, treatment, predicting future risk, targeted interventions and understanding of the disease. There have been plenty of successful examples in medicine of using big data, such as radiology and pathology, ophthalmology cardiology and surgery. Combining medicine and AI has become a powerful tool to change health care, and even to change the nature of disease screening in clinical diagnosis. As all we know, clinical laboratories produce large amounts of testing data every day and the clinical laboratory data combined with AI may establish a new diagnosis and treatment has attracted wide attention. At present, a new concept of radiomics has been created for imaging data combined with AI, but a new definition of clinical laboratory data combined with AI has lacked so that many studies in this field cannot be accurately classified. Therefore, we propose a new concept of clinical laboratory omics (Clinlabomics) by combining clinical laboratory medicine and AI. Clinlabomics can use high-throughput methods to extract large amounts of feature data from blood, body fluids, secretions, excreta, and cast clinical laboratory test data. Then using the data statistics, machine learning, and other methods to read more undiscovered information. In this review, we have summarized the application of clinical laboratory data combined with AI in medical fields. Undeniable, the application of Clinlabomics is a method that can assist many fields of medicine but still requires further validation in a multi-center environment and laboratory.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Clinical laboratory; Clinlabomics; Data mining; Data science; Deep learning; Machine learning; Medical laboratory science
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36153474 PMCID: PMC9509545 DOI: 10.1186/s12859-022-04926-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Bioinformatics ISSN: 1471-2105 Impact factor: 3.307
Fig. 1A The technology of “omics” e.g. genomics, proteomics, transcriptomics, metabolomics radiomics etc. can be used for more accurate predicting and understanding disease risks and formulating treatments for more specific and homogeneous populations by machine learning and statistical approaches. B Differences in the data structure between the different omics
Fig. 2The workflow for searching and filtering articles
Fig. 3The development of the time has created conditions for the establishment of Clinlabomics. Mainly include the advantage of the development of clinical laboratory and the coming of the era of big data
Fig. 4The Clinlabomics workflow. Collecting blood or body fluid sample and testing. From this clinical laboratory data to extract the features e.g. features based on range of clinical test data from healthy or patient with various diseases. These features are used for analysis, e.g. the features are assessed for their diagnostic prognostic power or linked with stage. Ultimately, it could lead to precision medicine and personalized medicine
The partial representative research of the application of Clinlabomics
| Application fields | Year | Sample size | Best models of analysis | Objective and achievement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical prediction | 2019 [ | 149,000 physical samples | Deep Neural Network (DNN) | Biological aging prediction |
| 2016 [ | 62,419 physical samples | Deep Neural Network (DNN) | Biological aging and Smoking status prediction | |
| 2021 [ | 285,965 diabetes patients and 1,221,598 healthy human samples | Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) | Risk prediction for diabetes | |
| 2017 [ | 79 paraquat poisoning patients (41 living and 38 deceased) | Support Vector Machine (SVM) | Predicting the prognosis of paraquat poisoning patients | |
| 2020 [ | 235 patients (89 benign ovarian tumors and 146 ovarian cancer) | Decision Tree Model | Predicting ovarian cancer | |
| 2021 [ | 1823 COVID-19 patients | Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) | Predicting the mortality of patients with COVID-19 | |
| Clinical diagnosis | 2012 [ | 203 iron deficiency anemia patients | Artificial Neural Network (ANN) | Iron deficiencyanemia diagnosis and iron serum level prediction |
| 2020 [ | 355 asthma patients and 1,480 Healthy individuals | Mahalanobis–Taguchi System (MTS) | Asthma diagnosis | |
| 2019 [ | 551 chronic kidney disease patients | Logistic Regression Model (LR) | CKD severity diagnosis and surveillance | |
| 2020 [ | 177 positive subjects and 102 negative subjects | Random Forest (RF) | COVID-19 infection diagnosis | |
| 2019 [ | 15,176 Neurological patients | The Smart Blood Analytics (SBA) Machine Learning (ML) Algorithm | Brain tumors diagnosis | |
| 2019 [ | 183 lung cancer patients and 94 patients without lung cancer | Random Forest (RF) | Lung cancer diagnosis | |
| 2021 [ | 1168 colorectal cancer patients and 1269 healthy subjects | Logistic Regression Model (LR) | Colorectal cancer diagnosis | |
| Clinical labortory management | 2018 [ | 10,799 training samples and 9839 testing samples | Support Vector Machine (SVM) | Identifying wrong blood in tube errors prior to test reporting |
| 2021 [ | 141,396 samples | Artificial Neural Network (ANN) | Identifying mislabeled samples | |
| 2021 [ | 192 clotted samples and 2889 normal blood samples | Back Propagation Neural Network (BPNN) | Identifying clotted specimens in coagulation testing | |
| 2018 [ | 4619 samples of urine steroid profiles | Tree-based Model | Aiding the Interpretation of urine steroid profiles | |
| 2022 [ | 202 consecutive chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients | Deep Neural Network (DNN) | Improving flow cytometry workflow efficiency for detecting of minimal residual disease of chronic lymphocytic leukemia | |
| 2022 [ | 254 healthy samples, 8800 physical examination population and 7700 outpatient samples | Normally distributed data: Transformed Hoffmann, Transformed Bhattacahrya, Kosmic and RefineR Algorithms Data with obvious skewness: Expectation Maximization (EM) Algorithm combined with Box-Cox Transformation | Establishing reference intervals for thyroid-related hormones in older adults | |
| 2019 [ | 212,554 urine samples | Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) | Screening urine microbiological inoculation samples |