Electronic health record phenotyping improves detection and screening of type 2 diabetes in the general United States population: A cross-sectional, unselected, retrospective study

Objectives: In the United States, 25% of people with type 2 diabetes are undiagnosed. Conventional screening models use limited demographic information to assess risk. We evaluated whether electronic health record (EHR) phenotyping could improve diabetes screening, even when records are incomplete and data are not recorded systematically across patients and practice locations. Methods: In this cross-sectional, retrospective study, data from 9,948 US patients between 2009 and 2012 were used to develop a pre-screening tool to predict current type 2 diabetes, using multivariate logistic regression. We compared (1) a full EHR model containing prescribed medications, diagnoses, and traditional predictive information, (2) a restricted EHR model where medication information was removed, and (3) a conventional model containing only traditional predictive information (BMI, age, gender, hypertensive and smoking status). We additionally used a random-forests classification model to judge whether including additional EHR information could increase the ability to detect patients with Type 2 diabetes on new patient samples. Results: Using a patient's full or restricted EHR to detect diabetes was superior to using basic covariates alone (p<0.001). The random forests model replicated on out-of-bag data. Migraines and cardiac dysrhythmias were negatively associated with type 2 diabetes, while acute bronchitis and herpes zoster were positively associated, among other factors. Conclusions: EHR phenotyping resulted in markedly superior detection of type 2 diabetes in a general US population, could increase the efficiency and accuracy of disease screening, and are capable of picking up signals in real-world records

Incidence of and predictors for antiseizure medication gaps in Medicare beneficiaries with epilepsy: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND For the two-thirds of patients with epilepsy who achieve seizure remission on antiseizure medications (ASMs), patients and clinicians must weigh the pros and cons of long-term ASM treatment. However, little work has evaluated how often ASM discontinuation occurs in practice. We describe the incidence of and predictors for sustained ASM fill gaps to measure discontinuation in individuals potentially eligible for ASM withdrawal. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort of Medicare beneficiaries. We included patients with epilepsy by requiring International Classification of Diseases codes for epilepsy/convulsions plus at least one ASM prescription each year 2014-2016, and no acute visit for epilepsy 2014-2015 (i.e., potentially eligible for ASM discontinuation). The main outcome was the first day of a gap in ASM supply (30, 90, 180, or 360 days with no pills) in 2016-2018. We displayed cumulative incidence functions and identified predictors using Cox regressions. RESULTS Among 21,819 beneficiaries, 5191 (24%) had a 30-day gap, 1753 (8%) had a 90-day gap, 803 (4%) had a 180-day gap, and 381 (2%) had a 360-day gap. Predictors increasing the chance of a 180-day gap included number of unique medications in 2015 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03 per medication, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.05) and epileptologist prescribing physician (≥25% of that physician's visits for epilepsy; HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.39-4.03). Predictors decreasing the chance of a 180-day gap included Medicaid dual eligibility (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0.95), number of unique ASMs in 2015 (e.g., 2 versus 1: HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.30-0.45), and greater baseline adherence (> 80% versus ≤80% of days in 2015 with ASM pill supply: HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.32-0.44). CONCLUSIONS Sustained ASM gaps were rarer than current guidelines may suggest. Future work should further explore barriers and enablers of ASM discontinuation to understand the optimal discontinuation rate

Antiseizure medication withdrawal risk estimation and recommendations: A survey of American Academy of Neurology and EpiCARE members

Objective Choosing candidates for antiseizure medication (ASM) withdrawal in well‐controlled epilepsy is challenging. We evaluated (a) the correlation between neurologists' seizure risk estimation (“clinician predictions”) vs calculated predictions, (b) how viewing calculated predictions influenced recommendations, and (c) barriers to using risk calculation.MethodsWe asked US and European neurologists to predict 2‐year seizure risk after ASM withdrawal for hypothetical vignettes. We compared ASM withdrawal recommendations before vs after viewing calculated predictions, using generalized linear models. Results Three‐hundred and forty‐six neurologists responded. There was moderate correlation between clinician and calculated predictions (Spearman coefficient 0.42). Clinician predictions varied widely, for example, predictions ranged 5%‐100% for a 2‐year seizure‐free adult without epileptiform abnormalities. Mean clinician predictions exceeded calculated predictions for vignettes with epileptiform abnormalities (eg, childhood absence epilepsy: clinician 65%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 57%‐74%; calculated 46%) and surgical vignettes (eg, focal cortical dysplasia 6‐month seizure‐free mean clinician 56%, 95% CI 52%‐60%; calculated 28%). Clinicians overestimated the influence of epileptiform EEG findings on withdrawal risk (26%, 95% CI 24%‐28%) compared with calculators (14%, 95% 13%‐14%). Viewing calculated predictions slightly reduced willingness to withdraw (−0.8/10 change, 95% CI −1.0 to −0.7), particularly for vignettes without epileptiform abnormalities. The greatest barrier to calculator use was doubting its accuracy (44%). Significance Clinicians overestimated the influence of abnormal EEGs particularly for low‐risk patients and overestimated risk and the influence of seizure‐free duration for surgical patients, compared with calculators. These data may question widespread ordering of EEGs or time‐based seizure‐free thresholds for surgical patients. Viewing calculated predictions reduced willingness to withdraw particularly without epileptiform abnormalities

AI is a viable alternative to high throughput screening: a 318-target study

: High throughput screening (HTS) is routinely used to identify bioactive small molecules. This requires physical compounds, which limits coverage of accessible chemical space. Computational approaches combined with vast on-demand chemical libraries can access far greater chemical space, provided that the predictive accuracy is sufficient to identify useful molecules. Through the largest and most diverse virtual HTS campaign reported to date, comprising 318 individual projects, we demonstrate that our AtomNet® convolutional neural network successfully finds novel hits across every major therapeutic area and protein class. We address historical limitations of computational screening by demonstrating success for target proteins without known binders, high-quality X-ray crystal structures, or manual cherry-picking of compounds. We show that the molecules selected by the AtomNet® model are novel drug-like scaffolds rather than minor modifications to known bioactive compounds. Our empirical results suggest that computational methods can substantially replace HTS as the first step of small-molecule drug discovery

26th Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting (CNS*2017): Part 3 - Meeting Abstracts - Antwerp, Belgium. 15–20 July 2017

This work was produced as part of the activities of FAPESP Research,\ud Disseminations and Innovation Center for Neuromathematics (grant\ud 2013/07699-0, S. Paulo Research Foundation). NLK is supported by a\ud FAPESP postdoctoral fellowship (grant 2016/03855-5). ACR is partially\ud supported by a CNPq fellowship (grant 306251/2014-0)