A Proposed Clinical Decision Support Architecture Capable of Supporting Whole Genome Sequence Information

Overview

Journal J Pers Med

Date 2014 Nov 21

PMID 25411644

Citations 6

Authors

Brandon M Welch

Salvador Rodriguez Loya

Karen Eilbeck

Kensaku Kawamoto

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Whole genome sequence (WGS) information may soon be widely available to help clinicians personalize the care and treatment of patients. However, considerable barriers exist, which may hinder the effective utilization of WGS information in a routine clinical care setting. Clinical decision support (CDS) offers a potential solution to overcome such barriers and to facilitate the effective use of WGS information in the clinic. However, genomic information is complex and will require significant considerations when developing CDS capabilities. As such, this manuscript lays out a conceptual framework for a CDS architecture designed to deliver WGS-guided CDS within the clinical workflow. To handle the complexity and breadth of WGS information, the proposed CDS framework leverages service-oriented capabilities and orchestrates the interaction of several independently-managed components. These independently-managed components include the genome variant knowledge base, the genome database, the CDS knowledge base, a CDS controller and the electronic health record (EHR). A key design feature is that genome data can be stored separately from the EHR. This paper describes in detail: (1) each component of the architecture; (2) the interaction of the components; and (3) how the architecture attempts to overcome the challenges associated with WGS information. We believe that service-oriented CDS capabilities will be essential to using WGS information for personalized medicine.

Citing Articles

A systematic literature review of AI-based digital decision support systems for post-traumatic stress disorder.

Bertl M, Metsallik J, Ross P Front Psychiatry. 2022; 13:923613.

PMID: 36016975 PMC: 9396247. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.923613.

Physicians' strategies for using family history data: having the data is not the same as using the data.

Taber P, Ghani P, Schiffman J, Kohlmann W, Hess R, Chidambaram V JAMIA Open. 2021; 3(3):378-385.

PMID: 34632321 PMC: 7660959. DOI: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaa035.

Development of a Genomic Data Flow Framework: Results of a Survey Administered to NIH-NHGRI IGNITE and eMERGE Consortia Participants.

Dexter P, Ong H, Elsey A, Bell G, Walton N, Chung W AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2020; 2019:363-370.

PMID: 32308829 PMC: 7153090.

Challenges of Identifying Clinically Actionable Genetic Variants for Precision Medicine.

Carter T, He M J Healthc Eng. 2016; 2016.

PMID: 27195526 PMC: 4955563. DOI: 10.1155/2016/3617572.

The genomic CDS sandbox: An assessment among domain experts.

Aziz A, Kawamoto K, Eilbeck K, Williams M, Freimuth R, Hoffman M J Biomed Inform. 2016; 60:84-94.

PMID: 26778834 PMC: 4948866. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2015.12.019.

References

Cook-Deegan R, Conley J, Evans J, Vorhaus D . The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets?. Eur J Hum Genet. 2012; 21(6):585-8. PMC: 3658186. DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2012.217. View

Hu H, Huff C, Moore B, Flygare S, Reese M, Yandell M . VAAST 2.0: improved variant classification and disease-gene identification using a conservation-controlled amino acid substitution matrix. Genet Epidemiol. 2013; 37(6):622-34. PMC: 3791556. DOI: 10.1002/gepi.21743. View

Stenson P, Mort M, Ball E, Howells K, Phillips A, Thomas N . The Human Gene Mutation Database: 2008 update. Genome Med. 2009; 1(1):13. PMC: 2651586. DOI: 10.1186/gm13. View

Talkowski M, Ordulu Z, Pillalamarri V, Benson C, Blumenthal I, Connolly S . Clinical diagnosis by whole-genome sequencing of a prenatal sample. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(23):2226-32. PMC: 3579222. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1208594. View

Teich J, Osheroff J, Pifer E, Sittig D, Jenders R . Clinical decision support in electronic prescribing: recommendations and an action plan: report of the joint clinical decision support workgroup. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005; 12(4):365-76. PMC: 1174880. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1822. View

Wright A, Sittig D, Ash J, Feblowitz J, Meltzer S, McMullen C . Development and evaluation of a comprehensive clinical decision support taxonomy: comparison of front-end tools in commercial and internally developed electronic health record systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011; 18(3):232-42. PMC: 3078666. DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000113. View

Rope A, Wang K, Evjenth R, Xing J, Johnston J, Swensen J . Using VAAST to identify an X-linked disorder resulting in lethality in male infants due to N-terminal acetyltransferase deficiency. Am J Hum Genet. 2011; 89(1):28-43. PMC: 3135802. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.05.017. View

Plon S, Eccles D, Easton D, Foulkes W, Genuardi M, Greenblatt M . Sequence variant classification and reporting: recommendations for improving the interpretation of cancer susceptibility genetic test results. Hum Mutat. 2008; 29(11):1282-91. PMC: 3075918. DOI: 10.1002/humu.20880. View

Bonetta L . Whole-genome sequencing breaks the cost barrier. Cell. 2010; 141(6):917-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.05.034. View

10.

Welch B, Kawamoto K . The need for clinical decision support integrated with the electronic health record for the clinical application of whole genome sequencing information. J Pers Med. 2014; 3(4):306-25. PMC: 4234059. DOI: 10.3390/jpm3040306. View

11.

Wade N . The quest for the $1,000 human genome: DNA sequencing in the doctor's office? At birth? It may be coming closer. N Y Times Web. 2006; :F1, F3. View

12.

Downing G, Boyle S, Brinner K, Osheroff J . Information management to enable personalized medicine: stakeholder roles in building clinical decision support. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2009; 9:44. PMC: 2763860. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-9-44. View

13.

Imamura M, Maeda S . Genetics of type 2 diabetes: the GWAS era and future perspectives [Review]. Endocr J. 2011; 58(9):723-39. DOI: 10.1507/endocrj.ej11-0113. View

14.

Peterson J, Bowton E, Field J, Beller M, Mitchell J, Schildcrout J . Electronic health record design and implementation for pharmacogenomics: a local perspective. Genet Med. 2013; 15(10):833-41. PMC: 3925979. DOI: 10.1038/gim.2013.109. View

15.

Hamilton A, Oishi S, Yano E, Gammage C, Marshall N, Scheuner M . Factors influencing organizational adoption and implementation of clinical genetic services. Genet Med. 2013; 16(3):238-45. DOI: 10.1038/gim.2013.101. View

16.

Masys D, Jarvik G, Abernethy N, Anderson N, Papanicolaou G, Paltoo D . Technical desiderata for the integration of genomic data into Electronic Health Records. J Biomed Inform. 2012; 45(3):419-22. PMC: 3328607. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.12.005. View

17.

Kawamoto K, Del Fiol G, Strasberg H, Hulse N, Curtis C, Cimino J . Multi-National, Multi-Institutional Analysis of Clinical Decision Support Data Needs to Inform Development of the HL7 Virtual Medical Record Standard. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011; 2010:377-81. PMC: 3041317. View

18.

Gottesman O, Kuivaniemi H, Tromp G, Andrew Faucett W, Li R, Manolio T . The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network: past, present, and future. Genet Med. 2013; 15(10):761-71. PMC: 3795928. DOI: 10.1038/gim.2013.72. View

19.

Starren J, Williams M, Bottinger E . Crossing the omic chasm: a time for omic ancillary systems. JAMA. 2013; 309(12):1237-8. PMC: 3857698. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.1579. View

20.

Horsky J, Schiff G, Johnston D, Mercincavage L, Bell D, Middleton B . Interface design principles for usable decision support: a targeted review of best practices for clinical prescribing interventions. J Biomed Inform. 2012; 45(6):1202-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2012.09.002. View