The Bioinformatics Open Source Conference (BOSC) 2013

Contact: [email protected]

BOSC 2022: the first hybrid and 23rd annual Bioinformatics Open Source Conference

The 23 rd annual Bioinformatics Open Source Conference (BOSC 2022) was part of this year's conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology (ISMB). Launched in 2000 and held every year since, BOSC is the premier meeting covering open source bioinformatics and open science. ISMB 2022 was, for the first time, a hybrid conference, with the in-person component hosted in Madison, Wisconsin (USA). About 1000 people attended ISMB 2022 in person, with another 800 online. Approximately 200 people participated in BOSC sessions, which included 28 talks chosen from submitted abstracts, 46 posters, and a panel discussion, "Building and Sustaining Inclusive Open Science Communities". BOSC 2022 included joint keynotes with two other COSIs. Jason Williams gave a BOSC / Education COSI keynote entitled "Riding the bicycle: Including all scientists on a path to excellence". A joint session with Bio-Ontologies featured a keynote by Melissa Haendel, "The open data highway: turbo-boosting translational traffic with ontologies.

BOSC 2019, the 20th annual Bioinformatics Open Source Conference.

The Bioinformatics Open Source Conference is a volunteer-organized meeting that covers open source software development and open science in bioinformatics. Launched in 2000, BOSC has been held every year since. BOSC 2019, the 20th annual BOSC, took place as one of the Communities of Special Interest (COSIs) at the Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology meeting (ISMB/ECCB 2019). The two-day meeting included a total of 46 talks and 55 posters, as well as eight Birds of a Feather interest groups. The keynote speaker was University of Cape Town professor Dr. Nicola Mulder, who spoke on "Building infrastructure for responsible open science in Africa". Immediately after BOSC 2019, about 50 people participated in the two-day CollaborationFest (CoFest for short), an open and free community-driven event at which participants work together to contribute to bioinformatics software, documentation, training materials, and use cases

The Ontology of Biological Attributes (OBA)-computational traits for the life sciences.

Existing phenotype ontologies were originally developed to represent phenotypes that manifest as a character state in relation to a wild-type or other reference. However, these do not include the phenotypic trait or attribute categories required for the annotation of genome-wide association studies (GWAS), Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL) mappings or any population-focussed measurable trait data. The integration of trait and biological attribute information with an ever increasing body of chemical, environmental and biological data greatly facilitates computational analyses and it is also highly relevant to biomedical and clinical applications. The Ontology of Biological Attributes (OBA) is a formalised, species-independent collection of interoperable phenotypic trait categories that is intended to fulfil a data integration role. OBA is a standardised representational framework for observable attributes that are characteristics of biological entities, organisms, or parts of organisms. OBA has a modular design which provides several benefits for users and data integrators, including an automated and meaningful classification of trait terms computed on the basis of logical inferences drawn from domain-specific ontologies for cells, anatomical and other relevant entities. The logical axioms in OBA also provide a previously missing bridge that can computationally link Mendelian phenotypes with GWAS and quantitative traits. The term components in OBA provide semantic links and enable knowledge and data integration across specialised research community boundaries, thereby breaking silos

KG-COVID-19: A Framework to Produce Customized Knowledge Graphs for COVID-19 Response.

Integrated, up-to-date data about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 is crucial for the ongoing response to the COVID-19 pandemic by the biomedical research community. While rich biological knowledge exists for SARS-CoV-2 and related viruses (SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV), integrating this knowledge is difficult and time-consuming, since much of it is in siloed databases or in textual format. Furthermore, the data required by the research community vary drastically for different tasks; the optimal data for a machine learning task, for example, is much different from the data used to populate a browsable user interface for clinicians. To address these challenges, we created KG-COVID-19, a flexible framework that ingests and integrates heterogeneous biomedical data to produce knowledge graphs (KGs), and applied it to create a KG for COVID-19 response. This KG framework also can be applied to other problems in which siloed biomedical data must be quickly integrated for different research applications, including future pandemics

NSAID use and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: a 38-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to reduce pain, fever, and inflammation but have been associated with complications in community-acquired pneumonia. Observations shortly after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 suggested that ibuprofen was associated with an increased risk of adverse events in COVID-19 patients, but subsequent observational studies failed to demonstrate increased risk and in one case showed reduced risk associated with NSAID use. METHODS: A 38-center retrospective cohort study was performed that leveraged the harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record data of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative. A propensity-matched cohort of 19,746 COVID-19 inpatients was constructed by matching cases (treated with NSAIDs at the time of admission) and 19,746 controls (not treated) from 857,061 patients with COVID-19 available for analysis. The primary outcome of interest was COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, which was classified as: moderate, severe, or mortality/hospice. Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), invasive ventilation, and all-cause mortality at any time following COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: Logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased COVID-19 severity (OR: 0.57 95% CI: 0.53-0.61). Analysis of secondary outcomes using logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.51 95% CI: 0.47-0.56), invasive ventilation (OR: 0.59 95% CI: 0.55-0.64), AKI (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.63-0.72), or ECMO (OR: 0.51 95% CI: 0.36-0.7). In contrast, the odds ratios indicate reduced risk of these outcomes, but our quantitative bias analysis showed E-values of between 1.9 and 3.3 for these associations, indicating that comparatively weak or moderate confounder associations could explain away the observed associations. CONCLUSIONS: Study interpretation is limited by the observational design. Recording of NSAID use may have been incomplete. Our study demonstrates that NSAID use is not associated with increased COVID-19 severity, all-cause mortality, invasive ventilation, AKI, or ECMO in COVID-19 inpatients. A conservative interpretation in light of the quantitative bias analysis is that there is no evidence that NSAID use is associated with risk of increased severity or the other measured outcomes. Our results confirm and extend analogous findings in previous observational studies using a large cohort of patients drawn from 38 centers in a nationally representative multicenter database

The case for open science: rare diseases.

The premise of Open Science is that research and medical management will progress faster if data and knowledge are openly shared. The value of Open Science is nowhere more important and appreciated than in the rare disease (RD) community. Research into RDs has been limited by insufficient patient data and resources, a paucity of trained disease experts, and lack of therapeutics, leading to long delays in diagnosis and treatment. These issues can be ameliorated by following the principles and practices of sharing that are intrinsic to Open Science. Here, we describe how the RD community has adopted the core pillars of Open Science, adding new initiatives to promote care and research for RD patients and, ultimately, for all of medicine. We also present recommendations that can advance Open Science more globally

KG-Hub-building and exchanging biological knowledge graphs.

MOTIVATION: Knowledge graphs (KGs) are a powerful approach for integrating heterogeneous data and making inferences in biology and many other domains, but a coherent solution for constructing, exchanging, and facilitating the downstream use of KGs is lacking. RESULTS: Here we present KG-Hub, a platform that enables standardized construction, exchange, and reuse of KGs. Features include a simple, modular extract-transform-load pattern for producing graphs compliant with Biolink Model (a high-level data model for standardizing biological data), easy integration of any OBO (Open Biological and Biomedical Ontologies) ontology, cached downloads of upstream data sources, versioned and automatically updated builds with stable URLs, web-browsable storage of KG artifacts on cloud infrastructure, and easy reuse of transformed subgraphs across projects. Current KG-Hub projects span use cases including COVID-19 research, drug repurposing, microbial-environmental interactions, and rare disease research. KG-Hub is equipped with tooling to easily analyze and manipulate KGs. KG-Hub is also tightly integrated with graph machine learning (ML) tools which allow automated graph ML, including node embeddings and training of models for link prediction and node classification. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://kghub.org

Annotation of the Drosophila melanogaster euchromatic genome: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: The recent completion of the Drosophila melanogaster genomic sequence to high quality and the availability of a greatly expanded set of Drosophila cDNA sequences, aligning to 78% of the predicted euchromatic genes, afforded FlyBase the opportunity to significantly improve genomic annotations. We made the annotation process more rigorous by inspecting each gene visually, utilizing a comprehensive set of curation rules, requiring traceable evidence for each gene model, and comparing each predicted peptide to SWISS-PROT and TrEMBL sequences. RESULTS: Although the number of predicted protein-coding genes in Drosophila remains essentially unchanged, the revised annotation significantly improves gene models, resulting in structural changes to 85% of the transcripts and 45% of the predicted proteins. We annotated transposable elements and non-protein-coding RNAs as new features, and extended the annotation of untranslated (UTR) sequences and alternative transcripts to include more than 70% and 20% of genes, respectively. Finally, cDNA sequence provided evidence for dicistronic transcripts, neighboring genes with overlapping UTRs on the same DNA sequence strand, alternatively spliced genes that encode distinct, non-overlapping peptides, and numerous nested genes. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of so many unusual gene models not only suggests that some mechanisms for gene regulation are more prevalent than previously believed, but also underscores the complex challenges of eukaryotic gene prediction. At present, experimental data and human curation remain essential to generate high-quality genome annotations