SPeC: A Soft Prompt-Based Calibration on Performance Variability of Large Language Model in Clinical Notes Summarization.

Electronic health records (EHRs) store an extensive array of patient information, encompassing medical histories, diagnoses, treatments, and test outcomes. These records are crucial for enabling healthcare providers to make well-informed decisions regarding patient care. Summarizing clinical notes further assists healthcare professionals in pinpointing potential health risks and making better-informed decisions. This process contributes to reducing errors and enhancing patient outcomes by ensuring providers have access to the most pertinent and current patient data. Recent research has shown that incorporating instruction prompts with large language models (LLMs) substantially boosts the efficacy of summarization tasks. However, we show that this approach also leads to increased performance variance, resulting in significantly distinct summaries even when instruction prompts share similar meanings. To tackle this challenge, we introduce a model-agnostic Soft Prompt-BasedCalibration (SPeC) pipeline that employs soft prompts to lower variance while preserving the advantages of prompt-based summarization. Experimental findings on multiple clinical note tasks and LLMs indicate that our method not only bolsters performance but also effectively regulates variance across different LLMs, providing a more consistent and reliable approach to summarizing critical medical information.

Travel Distance Between Participants in US Telemedicine Sessions With Estimates of Emissions Savings: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Digital health and telemedicine are potentially important strategies to decrease health care's environmental impact and contribution to climate change by reducing transportation-related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. However, we currently lack robust national estimates of emissions savings attributable to telemedicine. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) determine the travel distance between participants in US telemedicine sessions and (2) estimate the net reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions attributable to telemedicine in the United States, based on national observational data describing the geographical characteristics of telemedicine session participants. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study of telemedicine sessions in the United States between January 1, 2022, and February 21, 2023, on the doxy.me platform. Using Google Distance Matrix, we determined the median travel distance between participating providers and patients for a proportional sample of sessions. Further, based on the best available public data, we estimated the total annual emissions costs and savings attributable to telemedicine in the United States. RESULTS: The median round trip travel distance between patients and providers was 49 (IQR 21-145) miles. The median CO2 emissions savings per telemedicine session was 20 (IQR 8-59) kg CO2). Accounting for the energy costs of telemedicine and US transportation patterns, among other factors, we estimate that the use of telemedicine in the United States during the years 2021-2022 resulted in approximate annual CO2 emissions savings of 1,443,800 metric tons. CONCLUSIONS: These estimates of travel distance and telemedicine-associated CO2 emissions costs and savings, based on national data, indicate that telemedicine may be an important strategy in reducing the health care sector's carbon footprint.

Informatics tools to implement late cardiovascular risk prediction modeling for population management of high-risk childhood cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Clinical informatics tools to integrate data from multiple sources have the potential to catalyze population health management of childhood cancer survivors at high risk for late heart failure through the implementation of previously validated risk calculators. METHODS: The Oklahoma cohort (n = 365) harnessed data elements from Passport for Care (PFC), and the Duke cohort (n = 274) employed informatics methods to automatically extract chemotherapy exposures from electronic health record (EHR) data for survivors 18 years old and younger at diagnosis. The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) late cardiovascular risk calculator was implemented, and risk groups for heart failure were compared to the Children's Oncology Group (COG) and the International Guidelines Harmonization Group (IGHG) recommendations. Analysis within the Oklahoma cohort assessed disparities in guideline-adherent care. RESULTS: The Oklahoma and Duke cohorts both observed good overall concordance between the CCSS and COG risk groups for late heart failure, with weighted kappa statistics of .70 and .75, respectively. Low-risk groups showed excellent concordance (kappa > .9). Moderate and high-risk groups showed moderate concordance (kappa .44-.60). In the Oklahoma cohort, adolescents at diagnosis were significantly less likely to receive guideline-adherent echocardiogram surveillance compared with survivors younger than 13 years old at diagnosis (odds ratio [OD] 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10-0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical informatics tools represent a feasible approach to leverage discrete treatment-related data elements from PFC or the EHR to successfully implement previously validated late cardiovascular risk prediction models on a population health level. Concordance of CCSS, COG, and IGHG risk groups using real-world data informs current guidelines and identifies inequities in guideline-adherent care.

Leveraging electronic health record data for clinical trial planning by assessing eligibility criteria's impact on patient count and safety.

OBJECTIVE: To present an approach on using electronic health record (EHR) data that assesses how different eligibility criteria, either individually or in combination, can impact patient count and safety (exemplified by all-cause hospitalization risk) and further assist with criteria selection for prospective clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Trials in three disease domains - relapsed/refractory (r/r) lymphoma/leukemia; hepatitis C virus (HCV); stages 3 and 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) - were analyzed as case studies for this approach. For each disease domain, criteria were identified and all criteria combinations were used to create EHR cohorts. Per combination, two values were derived: (1) number of eligible patients meeting the selected criteria; (2) hospitalization risk, measured as the hazard ratio between those that qualified and those that did not. From these values, k-means clustering was applied to derive which criteria combinations maximized patient counts but minimized hospitalization risk. RESULTS: Criteria combinations that reduced hospitalization risk without substantial reductions on patient counts were as follows: for r/r lymphoma/leukemia (23 trials; 9 criteria; 623 patients), applying no infection and adequate absolute neutrophil count while forgoing no prior malignancy; for HCV (15; 7; 751), applying no human immunodeficiency virus and no hepatocellular carcinoma while forgoing no decompensated liver disease/cirrhosis; for CKD (10; 9; 23893), applying no congestive heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Within each disease domain, the more drastic effects were generally driven by a few criteria. Similar criteria across different disease domains introduce different changes. Although results are contingent on the trial sample and the EHR data used, this approach demonstrates how EHR data can inform the impact on safety and available patients when exploring different criteria combinations for designing clinical trials.

Distinguishing Admissions Specifically for COVID-19 From Incidental SARS-CoV-2 Admissions: National Retrospective Electronic Health Record Study.

BACKGROUND: Admissions are generally classified as COVID-19 hospitalizations if the patient has a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. However, because 35% of SARS-CoV-2 infections are asymptomatic, patients admitted for unrelated indications with an incidentally positive test could be misclassified as a COVID-19 hospitalization. Electronic health record (EHR)-based studies have been unable to distinguish between a hospitalization specifically for COVID-19 versus an incidental SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization. Although the need to improve classification of COVID-19 versus incidental SARS-CoV-2 is well understood, the magnitude of the problems has only been characterized in small, single-center studies. Furthermore, there have been no peer-reviewed studies evaluating methods for improving classification. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study are to, first, quantify the frequency of incidental hospitalizations over the first 15 months of the pandemic in multiple hospital systems in the United States and, second, to apply electronic phenotyping techniques to automatically improve COVID-19 hospitalization classification. METHODS: From a retrospective EHR-based cohort in 4 US health care systems in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Illinois, a random sample of 1123 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients hospitalized from March 2020 to August 2021 was manually chart-reviewed and classified as "admitted with COVID-19" (incidental) versus specifically admitted for COVID-19 ("for COVID-19"). EHR-based phenotyping was used to find feature sets to filter out incidental admissions. RESULTS: EHR-based phenotyped feature sets filtered out incidental admissions, which occurred in an average of 26% of hospitalizations (although this varied widely over time, from 0% to 75%). The top site-specific feature sets had 79%-99% specificity with 62%-75% sensitivity, while the best-performing across-site feature sets had 71%-94% specificity with 69%-81% sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive admissions were incidental. Straightforward EHR-based phenotypes differentiated admissions, which is important to assure accurate public health reporting and research.

Clinical comparison between trial participants and potentially eligible patients using electronic health record data: A generalizability assessment method.

OBJECTIVE: To present a generalizability assessment method that compares baseline clinical characteristics of trial participants (TP) to potentially eligible (PE) patients as presented in their electronic health record (EHR) data while controlling for clinical setting and recruitment period. METHODS: For each clinical trial, a clinical event was defined to identify patients of interest using available EHR data from one clinical setting during the trial's recruitment timeframe. The trial's eligibility criteria were then applied and patients were separated into two mutually exclusive groups: (1) TP, which were patients that participated in the trial per trial enrollment data; (2) PE, the remaining patients. The primary outcome was standardized differences in clinical characteristics between TP and PE per trial. A standardized difference was considered prominent if its absolute value was greater than or equal to 0.1. The secondary outcome was the difference in mean propensity scores (PS) between TP and PE per trial, in which the PS represented prediction for a patient to be in the trial. Three diverse trials were selected for illustration: one focused on hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients receiving a liver transplantation; one focused on leukemia patients and lymphoma patients; and one focused on appendicitis patients. RESULTS: For the HCV trial, 43 TP and 83 PE were found, with 61 characteristics evaluated. Prominent differences were found among 69% of characteristics, with a mean PS difference of 0.13. For the leukemia/lymphoma trial, 23 TP and 23 PE were found, with 39 characteristics evaluated. Prominent differences were found among 82% of characteristics, with a mean PS difference of 0.76. For the appendicitis trial, 123 TP and 242 PE were found, with 52 characteristics evaluated. Prominent differences were found among 52% of characteristics, with a mean PS difference of 0.15. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in clinical characteristics were observed between TP and PE among all three trials. In two of the three trials, not all of the differences necessarily compromised trial generalizability and subsets of PE could be considered similar to their corresponding TP. In the remaining trial, lack of generalizability appeared present, but may be a result of other factors such as small sample size or site recruitment strategy. These inconsistent findings suggest eligibility criteria alone are sometimes insufficient in defining a target group to generalize to. With caveats in limited scalability, EHR data quality, and lack of patient perspective on trial participation, this generalizability assessment method that incorporates control for temporality and clinical setting promise to better pinpoint clinical patterns and trial considerations.

Modern Information Technology for Cancer Research: What's in IT for Me? An Overview of Technologies and Approaches.

Information technology (IT) can enhance or change many scenarios in cancer research for the better. In this paper, we introduce several examples, starting with clinical data reuse and collaboration including data sharing in research networks. Key challenges are semantic interoperability and data access (including data privacy). We deal with gathering and analyzing genomic information, where cloud computing, uncertainties and reproducibility challenge researchers. Also, new sources for additional phenotypical data are shown in patient-reported outcome and machine learning in imaging. Last, we focus on therapy assistance, introducing tools used in molecular tumor boards and techniques for computer-assisted surgery. We discuss the need for metadata to aggregate and analyze data sets reliably. We conclude with an outlook towards a learning health care system in oncology, which connects bench and bedside by employing modern IT solutions.

Assessment of the impact of EHR heterogeneity for clinical research through a case study of silent brain infarction.

BACKGROUND: The rapid adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) holds great promise for advancing medicine through practice-based knowledge discovery. However, the validity of EHR-based clinical research is questionable due to poor research reproducibility caused by the heterogeneity and complexity of healthcare institutions and EHR systems, the cross-disciplinary nature of the research team, and the lack of standard processes and best practices for conducting EHR-based clinical research. METHOD: We developed a data abstraction framework to standardize the process for multi-site EHR-based clinical studies aiming to enhance research reproducibility. The framework was implemented for a multi-site EHR-based research project, the ESPRESSO project, with the goal to identify individuals with silent brain infarctions (SBI) at Tufts Medical Center (TMC) and Mayo Clinic. The heterogeneity of healthcare institutions, EHR systems, documentation, and process variation in case identification was assessed quantitatively and qualitatively. RESULT: We discovered a significant variation in the patient populations, neuroimaging reporting, EHR systems, and abstraction processes across the two sites. The prevalence of SBI for patients over age 50 for TMC and Mayo is 7.4 and 12.5% respectively. There is a variation regarding neuroimaging reporting where TMC are lengthy, standardized and descriptive while Mayo's reports are short and definitive with more textual variations. Furthermore, differences in the EHR system, technology infrastructure, and data collection process were identified. CONCLUSION: The implementation of the framework identified the institutional and process variations and the heterogeneity of EHRs across the sites participating in the case study. The experiment demonstrates the necessity to have a standardized process for data abstraction when conducting EHR-based clinical studies.

What Can We Expect Following Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty on a Regular Operating Table? A Validation Study of an Artificial Intelligence Algorithm to Monitor Adverse Events in a High-Volume, Nonacademic Setting.

BACKGROUND: Quality monitoring is increasingly important to support and assure sustainability of the orthopedic practice. Surgeons in nonacademic settings often lack resources to accurately monitor quality of care. Widespread use of electronic medical records (EMR) provides easier access to medical information, facilitating its analysis. However, manual review of EMRs is highly inefficient. Artificial intelligence (AI) software allows for the development of algorithms for extracting relevant complications from EMRs. We hypothesized that an AI-supported algorithm for complication data extraction would have an accuracy level equal to or higher than manual review after total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: A total of 532 consecutive patients underwent 613 THA between January 1 and December 31, 2017. A random derivation cohort (100 patients, 115 hips) was used to determine accuracy. After generation of a gold standard, the algorithm was compared to manual extraction to validate performance in raw data extraction. The full cohort (532 patients, 613 hips) was used to determine recall, precision, and F-value. RESULTS: AI accuracy was 95.0%, compared to 94.5% for manual review (P = .69). Recall of 96.0% (84.0%-100%), precision of 88.0% (33%-100%) and F-measure of 0.85 (0.5-1) was achieved for all adverse events. No adverse events were recorded in 80.6%, 1.3% required reintervention and 18.1% had "transient" events. CONCLUSION: The use of an automated, AI-supported search algorithm for EMRs provided continuous feedback on the quality of care with a performance level comparable to manual data extraction, but with greater speed. New clinical information surfaced, as 18.1% of patients can be expected to have "transient" problems.

Yield and bias in defining a cohort study baseline from electronic health record data.

AIMS: Despite growing interest in using electronic health records (EHR) to create longitudinal cohort studies, the distribution and missingness of EHR data might introduce selection bias and information bias to such analyses. We aimed to examine the yield and potential for these healthcare process biases in defining a study baseline using EHR data, using the example of cholesterol and blood pressure (BP) measurements. METHODS: We created a virtual cohort study of cardiovascular disease (CVD) from patients with eligible cholesterol profiles in the New England (NE) and Southeast (SE) networks of the Veterans Health Administration in the United States. Using clinical data from the EHR, we plotted the yield of patients with BP measurements within an expanding timeframe around an index date of cholesterol testing. We compared three groups: (1) patients with BP from the exact index date; (2) patients with BP not on the index date but within the network-specific 90th percentile around the index date; and (3) patients with no BP within the network-specific 90th percentile. RESULTS: Among 589,361 total patients in the two networks, 146,636 (61.0%) of 240,479 patients from NE and 289,906 (83.1%) of 348,882 patients from SE had BP measurements on the index date. Ninety percent had BP measured within 11 days of the index date in NE and within 5 days of the index date in SE. Group 3 in both networks had fewer available race data, fewer comorbidities and CVD medications, and fewer health system encounters. CONCLUSIONS: Requiring same-day risk factor measurement in the creation of a virtual CVD cohort study from EHR data might exclude 40% of eligible patients, but including patients with infrequent visits might introduce bias. Data visualization can inform study-specific strategies to address these challenges for the research use of EHR data.

A pragmatic method for transforming clinical research data from the research electronic data capture "REDCap" to Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Study Data Tabulation Model (SDTM): Development and evaluation of REDCap2SDTM.

The Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Study Data Tabulation Model (SDTM) can be used for new drug application studies as well as secondarily for creating a clinical research data warehouse to leverage clinical research study data across studies conducted within the same disease area. However, currently not all clinical research uses Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization (CDASH) beginning in the set-up phase of the study. Once already initiated, clinical studies that have not utilized CDASH are difficult to map in the SDTM format. In addition, most electronic data capture (EDC) systems are not equipped to export data in SDTM format; therefore, in many cases, statistical software is used to generate SDTM datasets from accumulated clinical data. In order to facilitate efficient secondary use of accumulated clinical research data using SDTM, it is necessary to develop a new tool to enable mapping of information for SDTM, even during or after the clinical research. REDCap is an EDC system developed by Vanderbilt University and is used globally by over 2100 institutions across 108 countries. In this study, we developed a simulated clinical trial to evaluate a tool called REDCap2SDTM that maps information in the Field Annotation of REDCap to SDTM and executes data conversion, including when data must be pivoted to accommodate the SDTM format, dynamically, by parsing the mapping information using R. We confirmed that generating SDTM data and the define.xml file from REDCap using REDCap2SDTM was possible. Conventionally, generation of SDTM data and the define.xml file from EDC systems requires the creation of individual programs for each clinical study. However, our proposed method can be used to generate this data and file dynamically without programming because it only involves entering the mapping information into the Field Annotation, and additional data into specific files. Our proposed method is adaptable not only to new drug application studies but also to all types of research, including observational and public health studies. Our method is also adaptable to clinical data collected with CDASH at the beginning of a study in non-standard format. We believe that this tool will reduce the workload of new drug application studies and will support data sharing and reuse of clinical research data in academia.

Standardizing data exchange for clinical research protocols and case report forms: An assessment of the suitability of the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Operational Data Model (ODM).

Efficient communication of a clinical study protocol and case report forms during all stages of a human clinical study is important for many stakeholders. An electronic and structured study representation format that can be used throughout the whole study life-span can improve such communication and potentially lower total study costs. The most relevant standard for representing clinical study data, applicable to unregulated as well as regulated studies, is the Operational Data Model (ODM) in development since 1999 by the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC). ODM's initial objective was exchange of case report forms data but it is increasingly utilized in other contexts. An ODM extension called Study Design Model, introduced in 2011, provides additional protocol representation elements. Using a case study approach, we evaluated ODM's ability to capture all necessary protocol elements during a complete clinical study lifecycle in the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health. ODM offers the advantage of a single format for institutions that deal with hundreds or thousands of concurrent clinical studies and maintain a data warehouse for these studies. For each study stage, we present a list of gaps in the ODM standard and identify necessary vendor or institutional extensions that can compensate for such gaps. The current version of ODM (1.3.2) has only partial support for study protocol and study registration data mainly because it is outside the original development goal. ODM provides comprehensive support for representation of case report forms (in both the design stage and with patient level data). Inclusion of requirements of observational, non-regulated or investigator-initiated studies (outside Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation) can further improve future revisions of the standard.

A domain analysis model for eIRB systems: addressing the weak link in clinical research informatics.

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are a critical component of clinical research and can become a significant bottleneck due to the dramatic increase, in both volume and complexity of clinical research. Despite the interest in developing clinical research informatics (CRI) systems and supporting data standards to increase clinical research efficiency and interoperability, informatics research in the IRB domain has not attracted much attention in the scientific community. The lack of standardized and structured application forms across different IRBs causes inefficient and inconsistent proposal reviews and cumbersome workflows. These issues are even more prominent in multi-institutional clinical research that is rapidly becoming the norm. This paper proposes and evaluates a domain analysis model for electronic IRB (eIRB) systems, paving the way for streamlined clinical research workflow via integration with other CRI systems and improved IRB application throughput via computer-assisted decision support.

Using aggregated, de-identified electronic health record data for multivariate pharmacosurveillance: a case study of azathioprine.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the use of aggregated and de-identified electronic health record (EHR) data for multivariate post-marketing pharmacosurveillance in a case study of azathioprine (AZA). METHODS: Using aggregated, standardized, normalized, and de-identified, population-level data from the Explore platform (Explorys, Inc.) we searched over 10 million individuals, of which 14,580 were prescribed AZA based on RxNorm drug orders. Based on logical observation identifiers names and codes (LOINC) and vital sign data, we examined the following side effects: anemia, cell lysis, fever, hepatotoxicity, hypertension, nephrotoxicity, neutropenia, and neutrophilia. Patients prescribed AZA were compared to patients prescribed one of 11 other anti-rheumatologic drugs to determine the relative risk of side effect pairs. RESULTS: Compared to AZA case report trends, hepatotoxicity (marked by elevated transaminases or elevated bilirubin) did not occur as an isolated event more frequently in patients prescribed AZA than other anti-rheumatic agents. While neutropenia occurred in 24% of patients (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.07-1.23), neutrophilia was also frequent (45%) and increased in patients prescribed AZA (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.22-1.34). After constructing a pairwise side effect network, neutropenia had no dependencies. A reduced risk of neutropenia was found in patients with co-existing elevations in total bilirubin or liver transaminases, supporting classic clinical knowledge that agranulocytosis is a largely unpredictable phenomenon. Rounding errors propagated in the statistically de-identified datasets for cohorts as small as 40 patients only contributed marginally to the calculated risk. CONCLUSION: Our work demonstrates that aggregated, standardized, normalized and de-identified population level EHR data can provide both sufficient insight and statistical power to detect potential patterns of medication side effect associations, serving as a multivariate and generalizable approach to post-marketing drug surveillance.

The Ontology of Clinical Research (OCRe): an informatics foundation for the science of clinical research.

To date, the scientific process for generating, interpreting, and applying knowledge has received less informatics attention than operational processes for conducting clinical studies. The activities of these scientific processes - the science of clinical research - are centered on the study protocol, which is the abstract representation of the scientific design of a clinical study. The Ontology of Clinical Research (OCRe) is an OWL 2 model of the entities and relationships of study design protocols for the purpose of computationally supporting the design and analysis of human studies. OCRe's modeling is independent of any specific study design or clinical domain. It includes a study design typology and a specialized module called ERGO Annotation for capturing the meaning of eligibility criteria. In this paper, we describe the key informatics use cases of each phase of a study's scientific lifecycle, present OCRe and the principles behind its modeling, and describe applications of OCRe and associated technologies to a range of clinical research use cases. OCRe captures the central semantics that underlies the scientific processes of clinical research and can serve as an informatics foundation for supporting the entire range of knowledge activities that constitute the science of clinical research.

Germany's Approach for the Secondary Use of Federated Real-World Data in the German Portal for Medical Research Data.

In the light of big data driven clinical research, fair access to real world clinical health data enables evidence to improve patient care. Germany's healthcare system provides an abundant data resource but unique challenges due to its federated nature, heterogeneity and high data-protection standards. The Medical Informatics Initiative (MII) developed concepts that are being implemented in the German Portal for Medical Research Data (FDPG) to grant access to distributed data-sources across state borders. The portal currently provides access to more than 10 million patient resources containing hundreds of millions of laboratory parameters, diagnostic reports, administered medications, procedures and specimens. Upcoming datasets include among others oncological data, molecular analysis results and microbiological findings. Here, we describe the philosophy, implementation and experience behind the framework: standardized access processes, interoperable fair data, software for in depth feasibility requests, tools to support researchers and hospital stakeholders alike as well as transparency measures to provide data use information for patients. Challenges remain to improve data quality and automatization of technical and organizational processes.

Comparing the Accuracy of Traditional vs. FHIR®-Based Extraction of Electronic Health Record Data for Two Clinical Trials.

While pilots and production use of software based on the Health Level Seven (HL7®) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR®) standard are increasing in clinical research, we lack consistent evaluative data on important outcomes, such as data accuracy. We compared the accuracy of EHR collected, FHIR® extracted data (called EHR-to-eCRF data collection) to traditional clinical trial data collection. The accuracy rate for EHR-collected data was significantly higher than for the same data collected through traditional methods. It is possible that EHR-collected (FHIR® extracted) data can substantially improve data quality in clinical studies while decreasing the burden on study sites.

Generating Clinical-Grade Gene-Disease Validity Classifications Through the ClinGen Data Platforms.

Clinical genetic laboratories must have access to clinically validated biomedical data for precision medicine. A lack of accessibility, normalized structure, and consistency in evaluation complicates interpretation of disease causality, resulting in confusion in assessing the clinical validity of genes and genetic variants for diagnosis. A key goal of the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) is to fill the knowledge gap concerning the strength of evidence supporting the role of a gene in a monogenic disease, which is achieved through a process known as Gene-Disease Validity curation. Here we review the work of ClinGen in developing a curation infrastructure that supports the standardization, harmonization, and dissemination of Gene-Disease Validity data through the creation of frameworks and the utilization of common data standards. This infrastructure is based on several applications, including the ClinGen GeneTracker, Gene Curation Interface, Data Exchange, GeneGraph, and website.

Rurality, Cardiovascular Risk Factors, and Early Cardiovascular Disease among Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancer Survivors.

Background and Aims: Cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) later in life potentiate risk for late cardiovascular disease (CVD) from cardiotoxic treatment among survivors. This study evaluated the association of baseline CVRFs and CVD in the early survivorship period. Methods: This analysis included patients ages 0-29 at initial diagnosis and reported in the institutional cancer registry between 2010 and 2017 (n = 1228). Patients who died within five years (n = 168), those not seen in the oncology clinic (n = 312), and those with CVD within one year of diagnosis (n = 17) were excluded. CVRFs (hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and obesity) within one year of initial diagnosis, were constructed and extracted from the electronic health record based on discrete observations, ICD9/10 codes, and RxNorm codes for antihypertensives. Results: Among survivors (n = 731), 10 incident cases (1.4%) of CVD were observed between one year and five years after the initial diagnosis. Public health insurance (p = 0.04) and late effects risk strata (p = 0.01) were positively associated with CVD. Among survivors with public insurance(n = 495), two additional cases of CVD were identified from claims data with an incidence of 2.4%. Survivors from rural areas had a 4.1 times greater risk of CVD compared with survivors from urban areas (95% CI: 1.1-15.3), despite adjustment for late effects risk strata. Conclusions: Clinically computable phenotypes for CVRFs among survivors through informatics methods were feasible. Although CVRFs were not associated with CVD in the early survivorship period, survivors from rural areas were more likely to develop CVD. Implications for Survivors: Survivors from non-urban areas and those with public insurance may be particularly vulnerable to CVD.

An Integrated Model for Patient Care and Clinical Trials (IMPACT) to support clinical research visit scheduling workflow for future learning health systems.

We describe a clinical research visit scheduling system that can potentially coordinate clinical research visits with patient care visits and increase efficiency at clinical sites where clinical and research activities occur simultaneously. Participatory Design methods were applied to support requirements engineering and to create this software called Integrated Model for Patient Care and Clinical Trials (IMPACT). Using a multi-user constraint satisfaction and resource optimization algorithm, IMPACT automatically synthesizes temporal availability of various research resources and recommends the optimal dates and times for pending research visits. We conducted scenario-based evaluations with 10 clinical research coordinators (CRCs) from diverse clinical research settings to assess the usefulness, feasibility, and user acceptance of IMPACT. We obtained qualitative feedback using semi-structured interviews with the CRCs. Most CRCs acknowledged the usefulness of IMPACT features. Support for collaboration within research teams and interoperability with electronic health records and clinical trial management systems were highly requested features. Overall, IMPACT received satisfactory user acceptance and proves to be potentially useful for a variety of clinical research settings. Our future work includes comparing the effectiveness of IMPACT with that of existing scheduling solutions on the market and conducting field tests to formally assess user adoption.