Engineering nonlinear epileptic biomarkers using deep learning and Benford's law

Artificial intelligence in epilepsy - applications and pathways to the clinic

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming health care, and its applications in epilepsy have increased exponentially over the past decade. Integration of AI into epilepsy management promises to revolutionize the diagnosis and treatment of this complex disorder. However, translation of AI into neurology clinical practice has not yet been successful, emphasizing the need to consider progress to date and assess challenges and limitations of AI. In this Review, we provide an overview of AI applications that have been developed in epilepsy using a variety of data modalities: neuroimaging, electroencephalography, electronic health records, medical devices and multimodal data integration. For each, we consider potential applications, including seizure detection and prediction, seizure lateralization, localization of the seizure-onset zone and assessment for surgical or neurostimulation interventions, and review the performance of AI tools developed to date. We also discuss methodological considerations and challenges that must be addressed to successfully integrate AI into clinical practice. Our goal is to provide an overview of the current state of the field and provide guidance for leveraging AI in future to improve management of epilepsy.

Development of a multigenomic liquid biopsy (PROSTest) for prostate cancer in whole blood

INTRODUCTION

We describe the development of a molecular assay from publicly available tumor tissue mRNA databases using machine learning and present preliminary evidence of functionality as a diagnostic and monitoring tool for prostate cancer (PCa) in whole blood.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We assessed 1055 PCas (public microarray data sets) to identify putative mRNA biomarkers. Specificity was confirmed against 32 different solid and hematological cancers from The Cancer Genome Atlas (n = 10,990). This defined a 27-gene panel which was validated by qPCR in 50 histologically confirmed PCa surgical specimens and matched blood. An ensemble classifier (Random Forest, Support Vector Machines, XGBoost) was trained in age-matched PCas (n = 294), and in 72 controls and 64 BPH. Classifier performance was validated in two independent sets (n = 263 PCas; n = 99 controls). We assessed the panel as a postoperative disease monitor in a radical prostatectomy cohort (RPC: n = 47).

RESULTS

A PCa-specific 27-gene panel was identified. Matched blood and tumor gene expression levels were concordant (r = 0.72, p < 0.0001). The ensemble classifier ("PROSTest") was scaled 0%-100% and the industry-standard operating point of ≥50% used to define a PCa. Using this, the PROSTest exhibited an 85% sensitivity and 95% specificity for PCa versus controls. In two independent sets, the metrics were 92%-95% sensitivity and 100% specificity. In the RPCs (n = 47), PROSTest scores decreased from 72% ± 7% to 33% ± 16% (p < 0.0001, Mann-Whitney test). PROSTest was 26% ± 8% in 37 with normal postoperative PSA levels (<0.1 ng/mL). In 10 with elevated postoperative PSA, PROSTest was 60% ± 4%.

CONCLUSION

A 27-gene whole blood signature for PCa is concordant with tissue mRNA levels. Measuring blood expression provides a minimally invasive genomic tool that may facilitate prostate cancer management.