Advertisement

Translational Bioinformatics and Clinical Research Informatics

  • C. Daniel
  • E. Albuisson
  • T. Dart
  • P. Avillach
  • M. Cuggia
  • Y. Guo
Chapter
Part of the Health Informatics book series (HI)

Abstract

Two new emerging sub-domains in biomedical informatics – translational bioinformatics and clinical research informatics – provide information technology (IT) solutions supporting research – whether basic, clinical or translational research. The aim of the so-called “translational research” is to improve the continuum between research and care and to facilitate personalized medicine. Translational research requires better cooperation between basic research centers, healthcare facilities, clinical research and public health organizations and therefore better integration of information systems of these sectors.

This chapter presents the main characteristics of information systems used in the biomedical research domain and especially focuses on the information technology (IT) infrastructures developed to better integrate clinical care and research activities. The opportunities for the different stakeholders and the main challenges faced while developing such infrastructures are presented. The technical challenges are especially addressed (semantic interoperability, data integration, solutions ensuring data quality, data security and patient privacy, data mining). The potential of EHRs and PHRs to improve patient recruitment, conduct feasibility studies, refine inclusion/exclusion criteria, enhance safety data and, in general, to inform basic and clinical research is addressed. Examples of key national or international information technology (IT) infrastructures dedicated to translational research are shortly described.

Keywords

Translational bioinformatics Clinical research informatics Biomedical research Clinical research Translational research Epidemiologic study characteristics as topic Evaluation studies as topic Patient selection 

References

  1. Aryanto KYE, Broekema A, Oudkerk M, Van Ooijen PMA (2012) Implementation of an anonymisation tool for clinical trials using a clinical trial processor integrated with an existing trial patient data information system. Eur Radiol 22:144–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ash JS, Anderson NR, Tarczy-Hornoch P (2008) People and organizational issues in research systems implementation. J Am Med Inform Assoc 15:283–289PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA et al (2000) Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet 25:25–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernstam EV, Hersh WR, Johnson SB et al (2009) Synergies and distinctions between computational disciplines in biomedical research: perspective from the Clinical and Translational Science Award programs. Acad Med 84:964–970PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown PJ, Sönksen P (2000) Evaluation of the quality of information retrieval of clinical findings from a computerized patient database using a semantic terminological model. J Am Med Inform Assoc 7:392–403PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brownstein JS, Sordo M, Kohane IS, Mandl KD (2007) The tell-tale heart: population-based surveillance reveals an association of rofecoxib and celecoxib with myocardial infarction. PLoS One 2(9):e840PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burgun A, Bodenreider O (2008) Accessing and integrating data and knowledge for biomedical research. Yearb Med Inform 91–101Google Scholar
  8. Butte AJ (2008a) Medicine. The ultimate model organism. Science 320:325–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Butte AJ (2008b) Translational bioinformatics: coming of age. J Am Med Inform Assoc 15:709–714PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Canim M, Kantarcioglu M, Malin B (2012) Secure management of biomedical data with cryptographic hardware. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 16:166–175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. CDISC (2013) http://www.cdisc.org/. Accessed 5 Oct 2013
  12. Chen R, Mias GI, Li-Pook-Than J et al (2012) Personal omics profiling reveals dynamic molecular and medical phenotypes. Cell 148:1293–1307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Covitz PA, Hartel F, Schaefer C et al (2003) caCORE: a common infrastructure for cancer informatics. Bioinformatics 19:2404–2412PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cuggia M, Besana P, Glasspool D (2011) Comparing semi-automatic systems for recruitment of patients to clinical trials. Int J Med Inform 80:371–388PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dugas M, Lange M, Müller-Tidow C et al (2010) Routine data from hospital information systems can support patient recruitment for clinical studies. Clin Trials 7:183–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. El Fadly A, Rance B, Lucas N et al (2011) Integrating clinical research with the Healthcare Enterprise: from the RE-USE project to the EHR4CR platform. J Biomed Inform 44(Suppl 1):S94–S102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Embi PJ, Payne PRO (2009) Clinical research informatics: challenges, opportunities and definition for an emerging domain. J Am Med Inform Assoc 16:316–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. FDA (2013) Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Investigations. http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/04d-0440-gdl0002.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2013
  19. Fridsma DB, Evans J, Hastak S, Mead CN (2008) The BRIDG project: a technical report. J Am Med Inform Assoc 15:130–137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gaughan A (2006) Bridging the divide: the need for translational informatics. Pharmacogenomics 7:117–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. IHE QRPH (2013) IHE Quality Research and Public Health. http://www.ihe.net/qrph/index.cfm. Accessed 5 Oct 2013
  22. Kohane IS, Churchill SE, Murphy SN (2012) A translational engine at the national scale: informatics for integrating biology and the bedside. J Am Med Inform Assoc 19:181–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kush R, Alschuler L, Ruggeri R et al (2007) Implementing single source: the STARBRITE proof-of-concept study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 14:662–673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kush RD, Helton E, Rockhold FW, Hardison CD (2008) Electronic health records, medical research, and the Tower of Babel. N Engl J Med 358:1738–1740PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Masys DR, Jarvik GP, Abernethy NF et al (2012) Technical desiderata for the integration of genomic data into electronic health records. J Biomed Inform 45:419–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Murphy SN, Mendis M, Hackett K, et al (2007) Architecture of the open-source clinical research chart from informatics for integrating biology and the bedside. AMIA annual symposium proceedings, pp 548–552Google Scholar
  27. Murphy SN, Gainer V, Mendis M et al (2011) Strategies for maintaining patient privacy in i2b2. J Am Med Inform Assoc 18(Suppl 1):i103–i108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Murphy SN, Dubey A, Embi PJ et al (2012) Current state of information technologies for the clinical research enterprise across academic medical centers. Clin Transl Sci 5:281–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nadkarni PM, Brandt CA (2006) The common data elements for cancer research: remarks on functions and structure. Methods Inf Med 45:594–601PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Ohmann C, Kuchinke W (2009) Future developments of medical informatics from the viewpoint of networked clinical research. Interoperability and integration. Methods Inf Med 48:45–54PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Payne PRO, Embi PJ, Sen CK (2009) Translational informatics: enabling high-throughput research paradigms. Physiol Genomics 39(3):131–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Prokosch HU, Ganslandt T (2009) Perspectives for medical informatics. Reusing the electronic medical record for clinical research. Methods Inf Med 48:38–44PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Ramsey SD, Scoggins JF, Blough DK et al (2009) Sensitivity of administrative claims to identify incident cases of lung cancer: a comparison of 3 health plans. J Manag Care Pharm 15:659–668PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Sarkar IN (2010) Biomedical informatics and translational medicine. J Transl Med 8:22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tan TW, Tong JC, Khan AM et al (2010) Advancing standards for bioinformatics activities: persistence, reproducibility, disambiguation and Minimum Information About a Bioinformatics investigation (MIABi). BMC Genomics 11(Suppl 4):S27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Taylor CF, Field D, Sansone S-A et al (2008) Promoting coherent minimum reporting guidelines for biological and biomedical investigations: the MIBBI project. Nat Biotechnol 26:889–896PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Te FC, Chunyan W, Zhiyuan S (2012) The impact of development of population-based study in the biomedical field on laws and regulations: a cross-strait experience on biobank development. J Int Bioethique 23(143–163):181–183Google Scholar
  38. Wang RY (1998) A product perspective on total data quality management. Commun ACM 41:58–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Warzel DB, Andonaydis C, McCurry B, et al (2003) Common data element (CDE) management and deployment in clinical trials. AMIA annual symposium proceedings, p 1048Google Scholar
  40. Weber GM, Murphy SN, McMurry AJ et al (2009) The Shared Health Research Information Network (SHRINE): a prototype federated query tool for clinical data repositories. J Am Med Inform Assoc 16:624–630PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Weng C, Tu SW, Sim I, Richesson R (2010) Formal representation of eligibility criteria: a literature review. J Biomed Inform 43:451–467PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhan C, Elixhauser A, Richards CL Jr et al (2009) Identification of hospital-acquired catheter-associated urinary tract infections from Medicare claims: sensitivity and positive predictive value. Med Care 47:364–369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Daniel
    • 1
  • E. Albuisson
    • 2
  • T. Dart
    • 3
  • P. Avillach
    • 4
  • M. Cuggia
    • 5
  • Y. Guo
    • 6
  1. 1.Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, INSERM UMRS 872 équipe 20CCS Domaine Patient AP-HPParisFrance
  2. 2.Faculté de Médecine de Nancy 9Université de LorraineVandoeuvre-les-Nancy cedexFrance
  3. 3.INSERM UMRS 872 équipe 20 15ParisFrance
  4. 4.INSERM UMRS 872 équipe 22 15ParisFrance
  5. 5.INSERM U936 Faculté de MédecineDIM - CHU PontchaillouRennesFrance
  6. 6.Department of ComputingImperial College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations