Data Mining Strategies Applied in Brain Injury Models

Traumatic brain injury or traumatic head injury is characterized as a direct physical impact or trauma to the head, causing brain injury. It represents a major national health problem without a US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapy. The application of neuroproteomics/neurogenomics has revolutionized the characterization of protein/gene dynamics, leading to a greater understanding of post-injury biochemistry. Neuroproteomics and Neurogenomics fields have undertaken major advances in the area of neurotrauma research focusing on biomarker identification. Several candidate markers have been identified and are being evaluated for their efficacy as biological biomarkers utilizing these “omics approaches”. The identification of these differentially expressed candidate markers using these techniques is proving to be only the first step in the biomarker development process. However, to translate these findings into the clinic, data-driven development cycle incorporating data-mining steps for discovery, qualification, verification, and clinical validation is needed. Data mining steps extend beyond the collected data level into an integrated scheme of animal modeling, instrumentation, and functional data analysis. In this chapter, we provide an introductory review of data-mining/systems biology coupled approaches that have been applied to biomarker discovery and clinical validation; in addition, the need for strengthening the integral roles of these disciplines in establishing a comprehensive understanding of specific brain disorder and biomarker identification in general.

[1]  N. Obuchowski,et al.  ROC curves in clinical chemistry: uses, misuses, and possible solutions. , 2004, Clinical chemistry.

[2]  S. Grant,et al.  Proteomics in Neuroscience: From Protein to Network , 2001, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[3]  G. Manley,et al.  Classification of traumatic brain injury for targeted therapies. , 2008, Journal of neurotrauma.

[4]  Steven A Carr,et al.  Protein biomarker discovery and validation: the long and uncertain path to clinical utility , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[5]  C. Kiel,et al.  Structures in systems biology. , 2007, Current opinion in structural biology.

[6]  R. Hayes,et al.  Novel neuroproteomic approaches to studying traumatic brain injury. , 2007, Progress in brain research.

[7]  A. Albert,et al.  On the use and computation of likelihood ratios in clinical chemistry. , 1982, Clinical chemistry.

[8]  P. Dash,et al.  Traumatic brain injury alters expression of hippocampal microRNAs: Potential regulators of multiple pathophysiological processes , 2009, Journal of neuroscience research.

[9]  S. Okie Traumatic brain injury in the war zone. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  Zhe Wu,et al.  Proteome analysis of up‐regulated proteins in the rat spinal cord induced by transection injury , 2006, Proteomics.

[11]  R. Hayes,et al.  Bioinformatics for Traumatic Brain Injury: Proteomic Data Mining , 2007 .

[12]  R. Bullock,et al.  Moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in adults , 2008, The Lancet Neurology.

[13]  A change in the market—investing in diagnostics , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[14]  N. Inagaki,et al.  Proteomic identification of a novel isoform of collapsin response mediator protein‐2 in spinal nerves peripheral to dorsal root ganglia , 2006, Proteomics.

[15]  D. Rennie,et al.  The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. , 2003, Annals of internal medicine.

[16]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Practical statistics for medical research , 1990 .

[17]  Ravi Iyengar,et al.  Quantitative Information Management for the Biochemical Computation of Cellular Networks , 2004, Science's STKE.

[18]  Fagan Tj Letter: Nomogram for Bayes theorem. , 1975 .

[19]  M. Zweig,et al.  Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. , 1993, Clinical chemistry.

[20]  A. Gabrielli,et al.  αII-spectrin breakdown products (SBDPs): diagnosis and outcome in severe traumatic brain injury patients. , 2010, Journal of neurotrauma.

[21]  Hiroaki Kitano,et al.  The systems biology markup language (SBML): a medium for representation and exchange of biochemical network models , 2003, Bioinform..

[22]  R. Hayes,et al.  Neuroproteomics in neurotrauma. , 2006, Mass spectrometry reviews.

[23]  Kathryn Saatman,et al.  Application of proteomics technology to the field of neurotrauma. , 2003, Journal of neurotrauma.

[24]  J. Wagner,et al.  Biomarkers and Surrogate End Points for Fit‐for‐Purpose Development and Regulatory Evaluation of New Drugs , 2007, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[25]  Firas H Kobeissy,et al.  Neuroproteomics and systems biology‐based discovery of protein biomarkers for traumatic brain injury and clinical validation , 2008, Proteomics. Clinical applications.

[26]  Ming Cheng Liu,et al.  Proteomic identification of biomarkers of traumatic brain injury , 2005, Expert review of proteomics.

[27]  C. Robertson,et al.  Clinical Significance of αII-Spectrin Breakdown Products in Cerebrospinal Fluid after Severe Traumatic Brain Injury , 2007 .

[28]  M. Tsuang,et al.  Shifting emphasis from pharmacogenomics to theragnostics , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[29]  Barbara Gregson,et al.  Design and analysis of phase III trials with ordered outcome scales: the concept of the sliding dichotomy. , 2005, Journal of neurotrauma.

[30]  R. Hayes,et al.  Neuroprotection targets after traumatic brain injury , 2006, Current opinion in neurology.

[31]  S. Grant,et al.  Systems biology in neuroscience: bridging genes to cognition , 2003, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[32]  P. Hunter,et al.  Using CellML in Computational Models of Multiscale Physiology , 2005, 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference.