Advertisement

Open PHACTS: A Semantic Knowledge Infrastructure for Public and Commercial Drug Discovery Research

  • Lee Harland
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7603)

Introduction

Technology advances in the last decade have led to a “digital revolution” in biomedical research. Much greater volumes of data can be generated in much less time, transforming the way researchers work [1]. Yet, for those seeking to develop new drugs to treat human disease, the task of assembling a coherent picture of existing knowledge from molecular biology to clinical investigation, can be daunting and frustrating. Individual electronic resources remain mostly disconnected, making it difficult to follow information between them. Those that contain similar types of data can describe them very differently, compounding the confusion. It can also be difficult to understand exactly where specific facts or data points originated or how to judge their quality or reliability. Finally, scientists routinely wish to ask questions that the system does not allow, or ask questions that span multiple different resources. Often the result of this is to simply abandon the enquiry, significantly diminishing the value to be gained from existing knowledge. Within pharmaceutical companies, such concerns have led to majorprogrammes in data integration; downloading, parsing, mapping, transforming and presenting public, commercial and private data. Much of this work is redundant between companies and significant resources could be saved by collaboration [2]. In an industry facing major economic pressures [3], the idea of combining forces to “get more for less” is very attractive and is arguably the only feasible route to dealing with the exponentially growing information landscape.

Keywords

SPARQL Query Semantic Technology Feasible Route Triple Store Digital Revolution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kell, D.B., Oliver, S.G.: Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis-driven science in the post-genomic era. Bioessays 26, 99–105 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barnes, M.R., Harland, L., Ford, S.M., Hall, M.D., Dix, I., Thomas, S., Williams-Jones, B.I., et al.: Lowering industry firewalls: pre-competitive informatics initiatives in drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 8, 701–708 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Scannell, J.W., Blanckley, A., Boldon, H., Warrington, B.: Diagnosing the decline in pharmaceutical R&D efficiency. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 11, 191–200 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harland, L., Larminie, C., Sansone, S.A., Popa, S., Marshall, M.S., Braxenthaler, M., Cantor, M., et al.: Empowering industrial research with shared biomedical vocabularies. Drug Discov. Today 21, 940–947 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Belleau, F., Nolin, M.A., Tourigny, N., Rigault, P., Morissette, J.J.: Bio2RDF: towards a mashup to build bioinformatics knowledge systems 41, 706–716 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, B., Dong, X., Jiao, D., Wang, H., Zhu, Q., Ding, Y., Wild, D.J.: Chem2Bio2RDF: a semantic framework for linking and data mining chemogenomic and systems chemical biology data. BMC Bioinformatics 12, 256 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Azzaoui, K., Jacoby, E., Senger, S., Rodríguez, E.C., Loza, M., Zdrazil, B.: Scientific questions to a next generation semantically enriched biomolecular internet resource (in Preparation)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaulton, A., Bellis, L.J., Bento, A.P., Chambers, J., Davies, M., Hersey, A., Light, Y., et al.: ChEMBL: a large-scale bioactivity database for drug discovery 40, D1100–D1107 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Groth, P., Gibson, A., Velterop, J.: The anatomy of a nanopublication. Information Services and Use 30, 51-56 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mons, B., van Haagen, H., Chichester, C., Hoen, P.B., den Dunnen, J.T., van Ommen, G., van Mulligen, E., et al.: The value of data. Nat. Genet. 43, 281–283 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    van Iersel, M.P., Pico, A.R., Kelder, T., Gao, J., Ho, I., Hanspers, K., Conklin, B.R., et al.: The BridgeDB framework: standardized access to gene, protein and metabolite identifier mapping services. BMC Bioinformatics 11, 5 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fensel, D., van Harmelen, F., Andersson, B., Brennan, P., Cunningham, H., Emanuele, D.V., Fischer, F., et al.: Towards LarKC: a Platform for Web-scale Reasoning. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC 2008), vol. 8 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Kallesøe, C.S.: Building scalable solutions with open source tools. In: Harland, L., Forster, F. (eds.) Open Source Software in Life Science Research. Woodhead Publishing Series in Biomedicine, London (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lee Harland
    • 1
  1. 1.ConnectedDiscovery LtdThe Open PHACTS ConsortiumLondonUK

Personalised recommendations