rEHR: An R package for manipulating and analysing Electronic Health Record data

Research with structured Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is expanding as data becomes more accessible; analytic methods advance; and the scientific validity of such studies is increasingly accepted. However, data science methodology to enable the rapid searching/extraction, cleaning and analysis of these large, often complex, datasets is less well developed. In addition, commonly used software is inadequate, resulting in bottlenecks in research workflows and in obstacles to increased transparency and reproducibility of the research. Preparing a research-ready dataset from EHRs is a complex and time consuming task requiring substantial data science skills, even for simple designs. In addition, certain aspects of the workflow are computationally intensive, for example extraction of longitudinal data and matching controls to a large cohort, which may take days or even weeks to run using standard software. The rEHR package simplifies and accelerates the process of extracting ready-for-analysis datasets from EHR databases. It has a simple import function to a database backend that greatly accelerates data access times. A set of generic query functions allow users to extract data efficiently without needing detailed knowledge of SQL queries. Longitudinal data extractions can also be made in a single command, making use of parallel processing. The package also contains functions for cutting data by time-varying covariates, matching controls to cases, unit conversion and construction of clinical code lists. There are also functions to synthesise dummy EHR. The package has been tested with one for the largest primary care EHRs, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), but allows for a common interface to other EHRs. This simplified and accelerated work flow for EHR data extraction results in simpler, cleaner scripts that are more easily debugged, shared and reproduced

Towards the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics in bipolar disorder.

BackgroundBipolar disorder (BD) is a psychiatric illness defined by pathological alterations between the mood states of mania and depression, causing disability, imposing healthcare costs and elevating the risk of suicide. Although effective treatments for BD exist, variability in outcomes leads to a large number of treatment failures, typically followed by a trial and error process of medication switches that can take years. Pharmacogenetic testing (PGT), by tailoring drug choice to an individual, may personalize and expedite treatment so as to identify more rapidly medications well suited to individual BD patients.DiscussionA number of associations have been made in BD between medication response phenotypes and specific genetic markers. However, to date clinical adoption of PGT has been limited, often citing questions that must be answered before it can be widely utilized. These include: What are the requirements of supporting evidence? How large is a clinically relevant effect? What degree of specificity and sensitivity are required? Does a given marker influence decision making and have clinical utility? In many cases, the answers to these questions remain unknown, and ultimately, the question of whether PGT is valid and useful must be determined empirically. Towards this aim, we have reviewed the literature and selected drug-genotype associations with the strongest evidence for utility in BD.SummaryBased upon these findings, we propose a preliminary panel for use in PGT, and a method by which the results of a PGT panel can be integrated for clinical interpretation. Finally, we argue that based on the sufficiency of accumulated evidence, PGT implementation studies are now warranted. We propose and discuss the design for a randomized clinical trial to test the use of PGT in the treatment of BD

The Functional DRD3 Ser9Gly Polymorphism (rs6280) Is Pleiotropic, Affecting Reward as Well as Movement

Abnormalities of motivation and behavior in the context of reward are a fundamental component of addiction and mood disorders. Here we test the effect of a functional missense mutation in the dopamine 3 receptor (DRD3) gene (ser9gly, rs6280) on reward-associated dopamine (DA) release in the striatum. Twenty-six healthy controls (HCs) and 10 unmedicated subjects with major depressive disorder (MDD) completed two positron emission tomography (PET) scans with [11C]raclopride using the bolus plus constant infusion method. On one occasion subjects completed a sensorimotor task (control condition) and on another occasion subjects completed a gambling task (reward condition). A linear regression analysis controlling for age, sex, diagnosis, and self-reported anhedonia indicated that during receipt of unpredictable monetary reward the glycine allele was associated with a greater reduction in D2/3 receptor binding (i.e., increased reward-related DA release) in the middle (anterior) caudate (p<0.01) and the ventral striatum (p<0.05). The possible functional effect of the ser9gly polymorphism on DA release is consistent with previous work demonstrating that the glycine allele yields D3 autoreceptors that have a higher affinity for DA and display more robust intracellular signaling. Preclinical evidence indicates that chronic stress and aversive stimulation induce activation of the DA system, raising the possibility that the glycine allele, by virtue of its facilitatory effect on striatal DA release, increases susceptibility to hyperdopaminergic responses that have previously been associated with stress, addiction, and psychosis

Treatment of psychotic symptoms in bipolar disorder with aripiprazole monotherapy: A meta-analysis

Background: We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available clinical trials concerning the usefulness of aripiprazole in the treatment of the psychotic symptoms in bipolar disorder.Methods: A systematic MEDLINE and repository search concerning clinical trials for aripiprazole in bipolar disorder was conducted.Results: The meta-analysis of four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on acute mania suggests that the effect size of aripiprazole versus placebo was equal to 0.14 but a more reliable and accurate estimation is 0.18 for the total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score. The effect was higher for the PANSS-positive subscale (0.28), PANSS-hostility subscale (0.24) and PANSS-cognitive subscale (0.20), and lower for the PANSS-negative subscale (0.12). No data on the depressive phase of bipolar illness exist, while there are some data in favour of aripiprazole concerning the maintenance phase, where at week 26 all except the total PANSS score showed a significant superiority of aripiprazole over placebo (d = 0.28 for positive, d = 0.38 for the cognitive and d = 0.71 for the hostility subscales) and at week 100 the results were similar (d = 0.42, 0.63 and 0.48, respectively).Conclusion: The data analysed for the current study support the usefulness of aripiprazole against psychotic symptoms during the acute manic and maintenance phases of bipolar illness. © 2009 Fountoulakis et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

The management of bipolar mania: a national survey of baseline data from the EMBLEM study in Italy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although a number of studies have assessed the management of mania in routine clinical practice, no studies have so far evaluated the short- and long-term management and outcome of patients affected by bipolar mania in different European countries.</p> <p>The objective of the study is to present, in the context of a large multicenter survey (EMBLEM study), an overview of the baseline data on the acute management of a representative sample of manic bipolar patients treated in the Italian psychiatric hospital and community settings. EMBLEM is a 2-year observational longitudinal study that evaluates across 14 European countries the patterns of the drug prescribed in patients with bipolar mania, their socio-demographic and clinical features and the outcomes of the treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study consists of a 12-week acute phase and a ≤ 24-month maintenance phase. Bipolar patients were included into the study as in- or out-patients, if they initiated or changed, according to the decision of their psychiatrist, oral antipsychotics, anticonvulsants and/or lithium for the treatment of an episode of mania.</p> <p>Data concerning socio-demographic characteristics, psychiatric and medical history, severity of mania, prescribed medications, functional status and quality of life were collected at baseline and during the follow-up period.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In Italy, 563 patients were recruited in 56 sites: 376 were outpatients and 187 inpatients. The mean age was 45.8 years. The mean CGI-BP was 4.4 (± 0.9) for overall score and mania, 1.9 (± 1.2) for depression and 2.6 (± 1.6) for hallucinations/delusions. The YMRS showed that 14.4% had a total score < 12, 25.1% ≥ 12 and < 20, and 60.5% ≥ 20. At entry, 75 patients (13.7%) were treatment-naïve, 186 (34.1%) were receiving a monotherapy (of which haloperidol [24.2%], valproate [16.7%] and lithium [14.5%] were the most frequently prescribed) while 285 (52.2%) a combined therapy (of which 8.0% were represented by haloperidol/lithium combinations). After a switch to an oral medication, 137 patients (24.8%) were prescribed a monotherapy while the rest (415, 75.2%) received a combination of drugs.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Data collected at baseline in the Italian cohort of the EMBLEM study represent a relevant source of information to start addressing the short and long-term therapeutic strategies for improving the clinical as well as the socio-economic outcomes of patients affected by bipolar mania. Although it's not an epidemiological investigation and has some limitations, the results show several interesting findings as a relatively late age of onset of bipolar disorder, a low rate of past suicide attempts, a low lifetime rate of alcohol abuse and drug addiction.</p

The personalized advantage index: Translating research on prediction into individualized treatment recommendations. A demonstration

Background: Advances in personalized medicine require the identification of variables that predict differential response to treatments as well as the development and refinement of methods to transform predictive information into actionable recommendations. Objective: To illustrate and test a new method for integrating predictive information to aid in treatment selection, using data from a randomized treatment comparison. Method: Data from a trial of antidepressant medications (N = 104) versus cognitive behavioral therapy (N = 50) for Major Depressive Disorder were used to produce predictions of post-treatment scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) in each of the two treatments for each of the 154 patients. The patient's own data were not used in the models that yielded these predictions. Five pre-randomization variables that predicted differential response (marital status, employment status, life events, comorbid personality disorder, and prior medication trials) were included in regression models, permitting the calculation of each patient's Personalized Advantage Index (PAI), in HRSD units. Results: For 60% of the sample a clinically meaningful advantage (PAI≥3) was predicted for one of the treatments, relative to the other. When these patients were divided into those randomly assigned to their "Optimal" treatment versus those assigned to their "Non-optimal" treatment, outcomes in the former group were superior (d = 0.58, 95% CI .17-1.01). Conclusions: This approach to treatment selection, implemented in the context of two equally effective treatments, yielded effects that, if obtained prospectively, would rival those routinely observed in comparisons of active versus control treatments. © 2014 DeRubeis et al

Possible Associations of NTRK2 Polymorphisms with Antidepressant Treatment Outcome: Findings from an Extended Tag SNP Approach

Background: Data from clinical studies and results from animal models suggest an involvement of the neurotrophin system in the pathology of depression and antidepressant treatment response. Genetic variations within the genes coding for the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and its key receptor Trkb (NTRK2) may therefore influence the response to antidepressant treatment. Methods: We performed a single and multi-marker association study with antidepressant treatment outcome in 398 depressed Caucasian inpatients participating in the Munich Antidepressant Response Signature (MARS) project. Two Caucasian replication samples (N = 249 and N = 247) were investigated, resulting in a total number of 894 patients. 18 tagging SNPs in the BDNF gene region and 64 tagging SNPs in the NTRK2 gene region were genotyped in the discovery sample; 16 nominally associated SNPs were tested in two replication samples. Results: In the discovery analysis, 7 BDNF SNPs and 9 NTRK2 SNPs were nominally associated with treatment response. Three NTRK2 SNPs (rs10868223, rs1659412 and rs11140778) also showed associations in at least one replication sample and in the combined sample with the same direction of effects ($P_{corr}$ = .018, $P_{corr}$ = .015 and $P_{corr}$ = .004, respectively). We observed an across-gene BDNF-NTRK2 SNP interaction for rs4923468 and rs1387926. No robust interaction of associated SNPs was found in an analysis of BDNF serum protein levels as a predictor for treatment outcome in a subset of 93 patients. Conclusions/Limitations: Although not all associations in the discovery analysis could be unambiguously replicated, the findings of the present study identified single nucleotide variations in the BDNF and NTRK2 genes that might be involved in antidepressant treatment outcome and that have not been previously reported in this context. These new variants need further validation in future association studies

Symptoms predicting remission after divalproex augmentation with olanzapine in partially nonresponsive patients experiencing mixed bipolar I episode: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Rating scale items in a 6-week clinical trial of olanzapine versus placebo augmentation in patients with mixed bipolar disorder partially nonresponsive to ≥14 days of divalproex monotherapy were analyzed to characterize symptom patterns that could predict remission. At baseline, the two treatment groups were similar.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>Factor analysis with Varimax rotation was performed <it>post hoc </it>on baseline items of the 21-Item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-21) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Backwards-elimination logistic regression ascertained factors predictive of protocol-defined endpoint remission (HDRS-21 score ≤ 8 and YMRS score ≤ 12) with subsequent determination of optimally predictive factor score cutoffs.</p> <p>Factors for Psychomotor activity (YMRS items for elevated mood, increased motor activity, and increased speech and HDRS-21 agitation item) and Guilt/Suicidality (HDRS-21 items for guilt and suicidality) significantly predicted endpoint remission in the divalproex+olanzapine group. No factor predicted remission in the divalproex+placebo group. Patients in the divalproex+olanzapine group with high pre-augmentation psychomotor activity (scores ≥10) were more likely to remit compared to those with lower psychomotor activity (odds ratio [OR] = 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22-7.79), and patients with marginally high Guilt/Suicidality (scores ≥2) were less likely to remit than those with lower scores (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.13-1.03). Remission rates for divalproex+placebo vs. divalproex+olanzapine patients with high psychomotor activity scores were 22% vs. 45% (p = 0.08) and 33% vs. 48% (p = 0.29) for patients with low Guilt/Suicidality scores.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Patients who were partially nonresponsive to divalproex treatment with remaining high vs. low psychomotor activity levels or minimal vs. greater guilt/suicidality symptoms were more likely to remit with olanzapine augmentation.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov; <url>http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00402324?term=NCT00402324&rank=1</url>, Identifier: NCT00402324</p

LICAVAL: combination therapy in acute and maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The challenge of Bipolar Disorder (BD) treatment is due to the complexity of the disease. Current guidelines represent an effort to help clinicians in their everyday practice but still have limitations, specially concerning to long term treatment. LICAVAL (e<it>fficacy and tolerability of the combination of <b>LI</b>thium and <b>CA</b>rbamazepine compared to lithium and <b>VAL</b>proic acid in the treatment of young bipolar patients</it>) study aim to evaluate acute and maintenance phase of BD treatment with two combined drugs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>LICAVAL is a single site, parallel group, randomized, outcome assessor blinded trial. BD I patients according to the DSM-IV-TR, in depressive, manic,/hypomanic or mixed episode, aged 18 to 35 years are eligible. After the diagnostic assessments, the patients are allocated for one of the groups of treatment (lithium + valproic acid or lithium + carbamazepine). Patients will be followed up for 8 weeks in phase I (acute treatment), 6 months in phase II (continuation treatment) and 12 months in phase III (maintenance treatment). Outcome assessors are blind to the treatment. The main outcome is the evaluation of changes in mean scores on CGI-BP-M between baseline and endpoint at the end of each phase of the study.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>LICAVAL is currently in progress, with patients in phase I, II or III. It will extended until august 2012.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Trials comparing specific treatments efficacy in BD (head to head) can show relevant information in clinical practice. Long term treatment is an issue of great important and should be evaluated carefully in more studies as long as BD is a chronic disease.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00976794</p

Characterization of a Large Group of Individuals with Huntington Disease and Their Relatives Enrolled in the COHORT Study

Careful characterization of the phenotype and genotype of Huntington disease (HD) can foster better understanding of the condition.We conducted a cohort study in the United States, Canada, and Australia of members of families affected by HD. We collected demographic and clinical data, conducted the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale and Mini-Mental State Examination, and determined Huntingtin trinucleotide CAG repeat length. We report primarily on cross-sectional baseline data from this recently completed prospective, longitudinal, observational study.As of December 31, 2009, 2,318 individuals enrolled; of these, 1,985 (85.6%) were classified into six analysis groups. Three groups had expanded CAG alleles (36 repeats or more): individuals with clinically diagnosed HD [n = 930], and clinically unaffected first-degree relatives who had previously pursued [n = 248] or not pursued [n = 112] predictive DNA testing. Three groups lacked expanded alleles: first-degree relatives who had previously pursued [n = 41] or not pursued [n = 224] genetic testing, and spouses and caregivers [n = 430]. Baseline mean performance differed across groups in all motor, behavioral, cognitive, and functional measures (p<0.001). Clinically unaffected individuals with expanded alleles weighed less (76.0 vs. 79.6 kg; p = 0.01) and had lower cognitive scores (28.5 vs. 29.1 on the Mini Mental State Examination; p = 0.008) than individuals without expanded alleles. The frequency of "high normal" repeat lengths (27 to 35) was 2.5% and repeat lengths associated with reduced penetrance (36 to 39) was 2.7%.Baseline analysis of COHORT study participants revealed differences that emerge prior to clinical diagnosis. Longitudinal investigation of this cohort will further characterize the natural history of HD and genetic and biological modifiers.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00313495