Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Rare Diseases: Is the Future Brighter?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Brasil S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6947640 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Rare Diseases: Is the Future Brighter?
Brasil Sandra S Pascoal Carlota C Francisco Rita R Dos Reis Ferreira Vanessa V Videira Paula A PA Valadão And Gonçalo AG
Genes 20191127 12
The amount of data collected and managed in (bio)medicine is ever-increasing. Thus, there is a need to rapidly and efficiently collect, analyze, and characterize all this information. Artificial intelligence (AI), with an emphasis on deep learning, holds great promise in this area and is already being successfully applied to basic research, diagnosis, drug discovery, and clinical trials. Rare diseases (RDs), which are severely underrepresented in basic and clinical research, can particularly ben ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:More than 7,000 rare diseases (RDs) exist worldwide, affecting approximately 350 million people, out of which only 5% have treatment. The development of novel genome sequencing techniques has accelerated the discovery and diagnosis in RDs. However, most patients remain undiagnosed. Epigenetics has emerged as a promise for diagnosis and therapies in common disorders (e.g., cancer) with several epimarkers and epidrugs already approved and used in clinical practice. Hence, it may also become an opportunity to uncover new disease mechanisms and therapeutic targets in RDs. In this "big data" age, the amount of information generated, collected, and managed in (bio)medicine is increasing, leading to the need for its rapid and efficient collection, analysis, and characterization. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly deep learning, is already being successfully applied to analyze genomic information in basic research, diagnosis, and drug discovery and is gaining momentum in the epigenetic field. The application of deep learning to epigenomic studies in RDs could significantly boost discovery and therapy development. This review aims to collect and summarize the application of AI tools in the epigenomic field of RDs. The lower number of studies found, specific for RDs, indicate that this is a field open to expansion, following the results obtained for other more common disorders.
| S-EPMC8131862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AlphaFold has burst into our lives. A powerful algorithm that underscores the strength of biological sequence data and artificial intelligence (AI). AlphaFold has appended projects and research directions. The database it has been creating promises an untold number of applications with vast potential impacts that are still difficult to surmise. AI approaches can revolutionize personalized treatments and usher in better-informed clinical trials. They promise to make giant leaps toward reshaping and revamping drug discovery strategies, selecting and prioritizing combinations of drug targets. Here, we briefly overview AI in structural biology, including in molecular dynamics simulations and prediction of microbiota-human protein-protein interactions. We highlight the advancements accomplished by the deep-learning-powered AlphaFold in protein structure prediction and their powerful impact on the life sciences. At the same time, AlphaFold does not resolve the decades-long protein folding challenge, nor does it identify the folding pathways. The models that AlphaFold provides do not capture conformational mechanisms like frustration and allostery, which are rooted in ensembles, and controlled by their dynamic distributions. Allostery and signaling are properties of populations. AlphaFold also does not generate ensembles of intrinsically disordered proteins and regions, instead describing them by their low structural probabilities. Since AlphaFold generates single ranked structures, rather than conformational ensembles, it cannot elucidate the mechanisms of allosteric activating driver hotspot mutations nor of allosteric drug resistance. However, by capturing key features, deep learning techniques can use the single predicted conformation as the basis for generating a diverse ensemble.
| S-EPMC9442638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the past, the skills required to make an accurate dermatological diagnosis have required exposure to thousands of patients over many years. However, in recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has made enormous advances, particularly in the area of image classification. This has led computer scientists to apply these techniques to develop algorithms that are able to recognize skin lesions, particularly melanoma. Since 2017, there have been numerous studies assessing the accuracy of algorithms, with some reporting that the accuracy matches or surpasses that of a dermatologist. While the principles underlying these methods are relatively straightforward, it can be challenging for the practising dermatologist to make sense of a plethora of unfamiliar terms in this domain. Here we explain the concepts of AI, machine learning, neural networks and deep learning, and explore the principles of how these tasks are accomplished. We critically evaluate the studies that have assessed the efficacy of these methods and discuss limitations and potential ethical issues. The burden of skin cancer is growing within the Western world, with major implications for both population skin health and the provision of dermatology services. AI has the potential to assist in the diagnosis of skin lesions and may have particular value at the interface between primary and secondary care. The emerging technology represents an exciting opportunity for dermatologists, who are the individuals best informed to explore the utility of this powerful novel diagnostic tool, and facilitate its safe and ethical implementation within healthcare systems.
| S-EPMC7497072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy. Yet people are often reluctant to trust automated systems, and some patient populations may be particularly distrusting. We sought to determine how diverse patient populations feel about the use of AI diagnostic tools, and whether framing and informing the choice affects uptake. To construct and pretest our materials, we conducted structured interviews with a diverse set of actual patients. We then conducted a pre-registered (osf.io/9y26x), randomized, blinded survey experiment in factorial design. A survey firm provided n = 2675 responses, oversampling minoritized populations. Clinical vignettes were randomly manipulated in eight variables with two levels each: disease severity (leukemia versus sleep apnea), whether AI is proven more accurate than human specialists, whether the AI clinic is personalized to the patient through listening and/or tailoring, whether the AI clinic avoids racial and/or financial biases, whether the Primary Care Physician (PCP) promises to explain and incorporate the advice, and whether the PCP nudges the patient towards AI as the established, recommended, and easy choice. Our main outcome measure was selection of AI clinic or human physician specialist clinic (binary, "AI uptake"). We found that with weighting representative to the U.S. population, respondents were almost evenly split (52.9% chose human doctor and 47.1% chose AI clinic). In unweighted experimental contrasts of respondents who met pre-registered criteria for engagement, a PCP's explanation that AI has proven superior accuracy increased uptake (OR = 1.48, CI 1.24-1.77, p < .001), as did a PCP's nudge towards AI as the established choice (OR = 1.25, CI: 1.05-1.50, p = .013), as did reassurance that the AI clinic had trained counselors to listen to the patient's unique perspectives (OR = 1.27, CI: 1.07-1.52, p = .008). Disease severity (leukemia versus sleep apnea) and other manipulations did not affect AI uptake significantly. Compared to White respondents, Black respondents selected AI less often (OR = .73, CI: .55-.96, p = .023) and Native Americans selected it more often (OR: 1.37, CI: 1.01-1.87, p = .041). Older respondents were less likely to choose AI (OR: .99, CI: .987-.999, p = .03), as were those who identified as politically conservative (OR: .65, CI: .52-.81, p < .001) or viewed religion as important (OR: .64, CI: .52-.77, p < .001). For each unit increase in education, the odds are 1.10 greater for selecting an AI provider (OR: 1.10, CI: 1.03-1.18, p = .004). While many patients appear resistant to the use of AI, accuracy information, nudges and a listening patient experience may help increase acceptance. To ensure that the benefits of AI are secured in clinical practice, future research on best methods of physician incorporation and patient decision making is required.
| S-EPMC10198520 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCavernous hemangioma and schwannoma are tumors that both occur in the orbit. Because the treatment strategies of these two tumors are different, it is necessary to distinguish them at treatment initiation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is typically used to differentiate these two tumor types; however, they present similar features in MRI images which increases the difficulty of differential diagnosis. This study aims to devise and develop an artificial intelligence framework to improve the accuracy of clinicians' diagnoses and enable more effective treatment decisions by automatically distinguishing cavernous hemangioma from schwannoma.MethodsMaterial: As the study materials, we chose MRI images as the study materials that represented patients from diverse areas in China who had been referred to our center from more than 45 different hospitals. All images were initially acquired on films, which we scanned into digital versions and recut. Finally, 11,489 images of cavernous hemangioma (from 33 different hospitals) and 3,478 images of schwannoma (from 16 different hospitals) were collected. Labeling: All images were labeled using standard anatomical knowledge and pathological diagnosis. Training: Three types of models were trained in sequence (a total of 96 models), with each model including a specific improvement. The first two model groups were eye- and tumor-positioning models designed to reduce the identification scope, while the third model group consisted of classification models trained to make the final diagnosis.ResultsFirst, internal four-fold cross-validation processes were conducted for all the models. During the validation of the first group, the 32 eye-positioning models were able to localize the position of the eyes with an average precision of 100%. In the second group, the 28 tumor-positioning models were able to reach an average precision above 90%. Subsequently, using the third group, the accuracy of all 32 tumor classification models reached nearly 90%. Next, external validation processes of 32 tumor classification models were conducted. The results showed that the accuracy of the transverse T1-weighted contrast-enhanced sequence reached 91.13%; the accuracy of the remaining models was significantly lower compared with the ground truth.ConclusionsThe findings of this retrospective study show that an artificial intelligence framework can achieve high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in automated differential diagnosis between cavernous hemangioma and schwannoma in a real-world setting, which can help doctors determine appropriate treatments.
| S-EPMC7327353 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveInvestigate the use of advanced natural language processing models to streamline the time-consuming process of writing and revising scholarly manuscripts.Materials and methodsFor this purpose, we integrate large language models into the Manubot publishing ecosystem to suggest revisions for scholarly texts. Our AI-based revision workflow employs a prompt generator that incorporates manuscript metadata into templates, generating section-specific instructions for the language model. The model then generates revised versions of each paragraph for human authors to review. We evaluated this methodology through 5 case studies of existing manuscripts, including the revision of this manuscript.ResultsOur results indicate that these models, despite some limitations, can grasp complex academic concepts and enhance text quality. All changes to the manuscript are tracked using a version control system, ensuring transparency in distinguishing between human- and machine-generated text.ConclusionsGiven the significant time researchers invest in crafting prose, incorporating large language models into the scholarly writing process can significantly improve the type of knowledge work performed by academics. Our approach also enables scholars to concentrate on critical aspects of their work, such as the novelty of their ideas, while automating tedious tasks like adhering to specific writing styles. Although the use of AI-assisted tools in scientific authoring is controversial, our approach, which focuses on revising human-written text and provides change-tracking transparency, can mitigate concerns regarding AI's role in scientific writing.
| S-EPMC11339502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWhy is there a major gap between the promises of AI and its applications in the domain of diagnostic radiology? To answer this question, we systematically review and critically analyze the AI applications in the radiology domain.MethodsWe systematically analyzed these applications based on their focal modality and anatomic region as well as their stage of development, technical infrastructure, and approval.ResultsWe identified 269 AI applications in the diagnostic radiology domain, offered by 99 companies. We show that AI applications are primarily narrow in terms of tasks, modality, and anatomic region. A majority of the available AI functionalities focus on supporting the "perception" and "reasoning" in the radiology workflow.ConclusionsThereby, we contribute by (1) offering a systematic framework for analyzing and mapping the technological developments in the diagnostic radiology domain, (2) providing empirical evidence regarding the landscape of AI applications, and (3) offering insights into the current state of AI applications. Accordingly, we discuss the potential impacts of AI applications on the radiology work and we highlight future possibilities for developing these applications.Key points• Many AI applications are introduced to the radiology domain and their number and diversity grow very fast. • Most of the AI applications are narrow in terms of modality, body part, and pathology. • A lot of applications focus on supporting "perception" and "reasoning" tasks.
| S-EPMC7979626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim is to offer an overview of the existing training programs and critically examine them and suggest avenues for further development of AI training programs for radiologists.MethodsDeductive thematic analysis of 100 training programs offered in 2019 and 2020 (until June 30). We analyze the public data about the training programs based on their "contents," "target audience," "instructors and offering agents," and "legitimization strategies."ResultsThere are many AI training programs offered to radiologists, yet most of them (80%) are short, stand-alone sessions, which are not part of a longer-term learning trajectory. The training programs mainly (around 85%) focus on the basic concepts of AI and are offered in passive mode. Professional institutions and commercial companies are active in offering the programs (91%), though academic institutes are limitedly involved.ConclusionsThere is a need to further develop systematic training programs that are pedagogically integrated into radiology curriculum. Future training programs need to further focus on learning how to work with AI at work and be further specialized and customized to the contexts of radiology work.Key points• Most of AI training programs are short, stand-alone sessions, which focus on the basics of AI. • The content of training programs focuses on medical and technical topics; managerial, legal, and ethical topics are marginally addressed. • Professional institutions and commercial companies are active in offering AI training; academic institutes are limitedly involved.
| S-EPMC8270863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Concurrent advances in information technology infrastructure and mobile computing power in many low and middle-income countries (LMICs) have raised hopes that artificial intelligence (AI) might help to address challenges unique to the field of global health and accelerate achievement of the health-related sustainable development goals. A series of fundamental questions have been raised about AI-driven health interventions, and whether the tools, methods, and protections traditionally used to make ethical and evidence-based decisions about new technologies can be applied to AI. Deployment of AI has already begun for a broad range of health issues common to LMICs, with interventions focused primarily on communicable diseases, including tuberculosis and malaria. Types of AI vary, but most use some form of machine learning or signal processing. Several types of machine learning methods are frequently used together, as is machine learning with other approaches, most often signal processing. AI-driven health interventions fit into four categories relevant to global health researchers: (1) diagnosis, (2) patient morbidity or mortality risk assessment, (3) disease outbreak prediction and surveillance, and (4) health policy and planning. However, much of the AI-driven intervention research in global health does not describe ethical, regulatory, or practical considerations required for widespread use or deployment at scale. Despite the field remaining nascent, AI-driven health interventions could lead to improved health outcomes in LMICs. Although some challenges of developing and deploying these interventions might not be unique to these settings, the global health community will need to work quickly to establish guidelines for development, testing, and use, and develop a user-driven research agenda to facilitate equitable and ethical use.
| S-EPMC7255280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective was to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in clinical radiology in The Netherlands.Materials and methodsUsing an embedded multiple case study, an exploratory, qualitative research design was followed. Data collection consisted of 24 semi-structured interviews from seven Dutch hospitals. The analysis of barriers and facilitators was guided by the recently published Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework for new medical technologies in healthcare organizations.ResultsAmong the most important facilitating factors for implementation were the following: (i) pressure for cost containment in the Dutch healthcare system, (ii) high expectations of AI's potential added value, (iii) presence of hospital-wide innovation strategies, and (iv) presence of a "local champion." Among the most prominent hindering factors were the following: (i) inconsistent technical performance of AI applications, (ii) unstructured implementation processes, (iii) uncertain added value for clinical practice of AI applications, and (iv) large variance in acceptance and trust of direct (the radiologists) and indirect (the referring clinicians) adopters.ConclusionIn order for AI applications to contribute to the improvement of the quality and efficiency of clinical radiology, implementation processes need to be carried out in a structured manner, thereby providing evidence on the clinical added value of AI applications.Key points• Successful implementation of AI in radiology requires collaboration between radiologists and referring clinicians. • Implementation of AI in radiology is facilitated by the presence of a local champion. • Evidence on the clinical added value of AI in radiology is needed for successful implementation.
| S-EPMC7476917 | biostudies-literature