BoolFilter: an R package for estimation and identification of partially-observed Boolean dynamical systems

Abstract Background Gene regulatory networks govern the function of key cellular processes, such as control of the cell cycle, response to stress, DNA repair mechanisms, and more. Boolean networks have been used successfully in modeling gene regulatory networks. In the Boolean network model, the transcriptional state of each gene is represented by 0 (inactive) or 1 (active), and the relationship among genes is represented by logical gates updated at discrete time points. However, the Boolean gene states are never observed directly, but only indirectly and incompletely through noisy measurements based on expression technologies such as cDNA microarrays, RNA-Seq, and cell imaging-based assays. The Partially-Observed Boolean Dynamical System (POBDS) signal model is distinct from other deterministic and stochastic Boolean network models in removing the requirement of a directly observable Boolean state vector and allowing uncertainty in the measurement process, addressing the scenario encountered in practice in transcriptomic analysis. Results BoolFilter is an R package that implements the POBDS model and associated algorithms for state and parameter estimation. It allows the user to estimate the Boolean states, network topology, and measurement parameters from time series of transcriptomic data using exact and approximated (particle) filters, as well as simulate the transcriptomic data for a given Boolean network model. Some of its infrastructure, such as the network interface, is the same as in the previously published R package for Boolean Networks BoolNet, which enhances compatibility and user accessibility to the new package. Conclusions We introduce the R package BoolFilter for Partially-Observed Boolean Dynamical Systems (POBDS). The BoolFilter package provides a useful toolbox for the bioinformatics community, with state-of-the-art algorithms for simulation of time series transcriptomic data as well as the inverse process of system identification from data obtained with various expression technologies such as cDNA microarrays, RNA-Seq, and cell imaging-based assays

A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). CAPRIE Steering Committee

Many clinical trials have evaluated the benefit of long-term use of antiplatelet drugs in reducing the risk of clinical thrombotic events. Aspirin and ticlopidine have been shown to be effective, but both have potentially serious adverse effects. Clopidogrel, a new thienopyridine derivative similar to ticlopidine, is an inhibitor of platelet aggregation induced by adenosine diphosphate. METHODS: CAPRIE was a randomised, blinded, international trial designed to assess the relative efficacy of clopidogrel (75 mg once daily) and aspirin (325 mg once daily) in reducing the risk of a composite outcome cluster of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death; their relative safety was also assessed. The population studied comprised subgroups of patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease manifested as either recent ischaemic stroke, recent myocardial infarction, or symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Patients were followed for 1 to 3 years. FINDINGS: 19,185 patients, with more than 6300 in each of the clinical subgroups, were recruited over 3 years, with a mean follow-up of 1.91 years. There were 1960 first events included in the outcome cluster on which an intention-to-treat analysis showed that patients treated with clopidogrel had an annual 5.32% risk of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death compared with 5.83% with aspirin. These rates reflect a statistically significant (p = 0.043) relative-risk reduction of 8.7% in favour of clopidogrel (95% Cl 0.3-16.5). Corresponding on-treatment analysis yielded a relative-risk reduction of 9.4%. There were no major differences in terms of safety. Reported adverse experiences in the clopidogrel and aspirin groups judged to be severe included rash (0.26% vs 0.10%), diarrhoea (0.23% vs 0.11%), upper gastrointestinal discomfort (0.97% vs 1.22%), intracranial haemorrhage (0.33% vs 0.47%), and gastrointestinal haemorrhage (0.52% vs 0.72%), respectively. There were ten (0.10%) patients in the clopidogrel group with significant reductions in neutrophils (< 1.2 x 10(9)/L) and 16 (0.17%) in the aspirin group. INTERPRETATION: Long-term administration of clopidogrel to patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease is more effective than aspirin in reducing the combined risk of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death. The overall safety profile of clopidogrel is at least as good as that of medium-dose aspirin