Adverse Drug Event Prediction Using Noisy Literature-Derived Knowledge Graphs: Algorithm Development and Validation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are unintended side effects of drugs that cause substantial clinical and economic burdens globally. Not all ADEs are discovered during clinical trials; therefore, postmarketing surveillance, called pharmacovigilance, is routinely conducted to find unknown ADEs. A wealth of information, which facilitates ADE discovery, lies in the growing body of biomedical literature. Knowledge graphs (KGs) encode information from the literature, where the vertices and the edges represent clinical concepts and their relations, respectively. The scale and unstructured form of the literature necessitates the use of natural language processing (NLP) to automatically create such KGs. Previous studies have demonstrated the utility of such literature-derived KGs in ADE prediction. Through unsupervised learning of the representations (features) of clinical concepts from the KG, which are used in machine learning models, state-of-the-art results for ADE prediction were obtained on benchmark data sets. OBJECTIVE: Due to the use of NLP to infer literature-derived KGs, there is noise in the form of false positive (erroneous) and false negative (absent) nodes and edges. Previous representation learning methods do not account for such inaccuracies in the graph. NLP algorithms can quantify the confidence in their inference of extracted concepts and relations from the literature. Our hypothesis, which motivates this work, is that by using such confidence scores during representation learning, the learned embeddings would yield better features for ADE prediction models. METHODS: We developed methods to use these confidence scores on two well-known representation learning methods-DeepWalk and Translating Embeddings for Modeling Multi-relational Data (TransE)-to develop their weighted versions: Weighted DeepWalk and Weighted TransE. These methods were used to learn representations from a large literature-derived KG, the Semantic MEDLINE Database, which contains more than 93 million clinical relations. They were compared with Embedding of Semantic Predications, which, to our knowledge, is the best reported representation learning method using the Semantic MEDLINE Database with state-of-the-art results for ADE prediction. Representations learned from different methods were used (separately) as features of drugs and diseases to build classification models for ADE prediction using benchmark data sets. The methods were compared rigorously over multiple cross-validation settings. RESULTS: -score and 8.4% in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value, thus advancing the state of the art in ADE prediction from literature-derived KGs. CONCLUSIONS: Our classification models can be used to aid pharmacovigilance teams in detecting potentially new ADEs. Our experiments demonstrate the importance of modeling inaccuracies in the inferred KGs for representation learning.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».