Targeted omics and systems medicine: personalising care

Applying systems biology to biomedical research and health care: a précising definition of systems medicine

BACKGROUND

Systems medicine has become a key word in biomedical research. Although it is often referred to as P4-(predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory)-medicine, it still lacks a clear definition and is open to interpretation. This conceptual lack of clarity complicates the scientific and public discourse on chances, risks and limits of Systems Medicine and may lead to unfounded hopes. Against this background, our goal was to develop a sufficiently precise and widely acceptable definition of Systems Medicine.

METHODS

In a first step, PubMed was searched using the keyword "systems medicine". A data extraction tabloid was developed putting forward a means/ends-division. Full-texts of articles containing Systems Medicine in title or abstract were screened for definitions. Definitions were extracted; their semantic elements were assigned as either means or ends. To reduce complexity of the resulting list, summary categories were developed inductively. In a second step, we applied six criteria for adequate definitions (necessity, non-circularity, non-redundancy, consistency, non-vagueness, and coherence) to these categories to derive a so-called précising definition of Systems Medicine.

RESULTS

We identified 185 articles containing the term Systems Medicine in title or abstract. 67 contained at least one definition of Systems Medicine. In 98 definitions, we found 114 means and 132 ends. From these we derived the précising definition: Systems Medicine is an approach seeking to improve medical research (i.e. the understanding of complex processes occurring in diseases, pathologies and health states as well as innovative approaches to drug discovery) and health care (i.e. prevention, prediction, diagnosis and treatment) through stratification by means of Systems Biology (i.e. data integration, modeling, experimentation and bioinformatics). Our study also revealed the visionary character of Systems Medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our insights, on the one hand, allow for a realistic identification of actual ethical as well as legal issues arising in the context of Systems Medicine and, in consequence, for a realistic debate of questions concerning its matter and (future) handling. On the other hand, they help avoiding unfounded hopes and unrealistic expectations. This especially holds for goals like improving patient participation which are intensely debated in the context of Systems Medicine, however not implied in the concept.

Clinical management of severe therapy-resistant asthma

INTRODUCTION

Severe therapy-resistant asthma is an area where there has been recent advances in understanding that is percolating into improvements in management. Areas covered: This review covers the recent definition and approach to the diagnosis of severe asthma and its differentiation from difficult-to-treat asthma. The recent advances in phenotyping severe asthma and in ensuing changes in management approaches together with the introduction of new therapies are covered from a review of the recent literature. Expert commentary: After ascertaining the diagnosis of severe asthma, patients need to be treated adequately with existing therapies. The management approach to severe asthma now comprises of a phenotyping step for the definition of either an allergic or eosinophilic severe asthma for which targeted therapies are currently available. This will lead to a precision medicine approach to the management of severe asthma.

Bridging the gap between clinicians and systems biologists: from network biology to translational biomedical research

With the wealth of data accumulated from completely sequenced genomes and other high-throughput experiments, global studies of biological systems, by simultaneously investigating multiple biological entities (e.g. genes, transcripts, proteins), has become a routine. Network representation is frequently used to capture the presence of these molecules as well as their relationship. Network biology has been widely used in molecular biology and genetics, where several network properties have been shown to be functionally important. Here, we discuss how such methodology can be useful to translational biomedical research, where scientists traditionally focus on one or a small set of genes, diseases, and drug candidates at any one time. We first give an overview of network representation frequently used in biology: what nodes and edges represent, and review its application in preclinical research to date. Using cancer as an example, we review how network biology can facilitate system-wide approaches to identify targeted small molecule inhibitors. These types of inhibitors have the potential to be more specific, resulting in high efficacy treatments with less side effects, compared to the conventional treatments such as chemotherapy. Global analysis may provide better insight into the overall picture of human diseases, as well as identify previously overlooked problems, leading to rapid advances in medicine. From the clinicians’ point of view, it is necessary to bridge the gap between theoretical network biology and practical biomedical research, in order to improve the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of the world’s major diseases.

A validated gene regulatory network and GWAS identifies early regulators of T cell-associated diseases

Early regulators of disease may increase understanding of disease mechanisms and serve as markers for presymptomatic diagnosis and treatment. However, early regulators are difficult to identify because patients generally present after they are symptomatic. We hypothesized that early regulators of T cell-associated diseases could be found by identifying upstream transcription factors (TFs) in T cell differentiation and by prioritizing hub TFs that were enriched for disease-associated polymorphisms. A gene regulatory network (GRN) was constructed by time series profiling of the transcriptomes and methylomes of human CD4(+) T cells during in vitro differentiation into four helper T cell lineages, in combination with sequence-based TF binding predictions. The TFs GATA3, MAF, and MYB were identified as early regulators and validated by ChIP-seq (chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing) and small interfering RNA knockdowns. Differential mRNA expression of the TFs and their targets in T cell-associated diseases supports their clinical relevance. To directly test if the TFs were altered early in disease, T cells from patients with two T cell-mediated diseases, multiple sclerosis and seasonal allergic rhinitis, were analyzed. Strikingly, the TFs were differentially expressed during asymptomatic stages of both diseases, whereas their targets showed altered expression during symptomatic stages. This analytical strategy to identify early regulators of disease by combining GRNs with genome-wide association studies may be generally applicable for functional and clinical studies of early disease development.

Scaling up strategies of the chronic respiratory disease programme of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (Action Plan B3: Area 5)

Action Plan B3 of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA) focuses on the integrated care of chronic diseases. Area 5 (Care Pathways) was initiated using chronic respiratory diseases as a model. The chronic respiratory disease action plan includes (1) AIRWAYS integrated care pathways (ICPs), (2) the joint initiative between the Reference site MACVIA-LR (Contre les MAladies Chroniques pour un VIeillissement Actif) and ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma), (3) Commitments for Action to the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing and the AIRWAYS ICPs network. It is deployed in collaboration with the World Health Organization Global Alliance against Chronic Respiratory Diseases (GARD). The European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing has proposed a 5-step framework for developing an individual scaling up strategy: (1) what to scale up: (1-a) databases of good practices, (1-b) assessment of viability of the scaling up of good practices, (1-c) classification of good practices for local replication and (2) how to scale up: (2-a) facilitating partnerships for scaling up, (2-b) implementation of key success factors and lessons learnt, including emerging technologies for individualised and predictive medicine. This strategy has already been applied to the chronic respiratory disease action plan of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing.

Systems medicine of inflammaging

Systems Medicine (SM) can be defined as an extension of Systems Biology (SB) to Clinical-Epidemiological disciplines through a shifting paradigm, starting from a cellular, toward a patient centered framework. According to this vision, the three pillars of SM are Biomedical hypotheses, experimental data, mainly achieved by Omics technologies and tailored computational, statistical and modeling tools. The three SM pillars are highly interconnected, and their balancing is crucial. Despite the great technological progresses producing huge amount of data (Big Data) and impressive computational facilities, the Bio-Medical hypotheses are still of primary importance. A paradigmatic example of unifying Bio-Medical theory is the concept of Inflammaging. This complex phenotype is involved in a large number of pathologies and patho-physiological processes such as aging, age-related diseases and cancer, all sharing a common inflammatory pathogenesis. This Biomedical hypothesis can be mapped into an ecological perspective capable to describe by quantitative and predictive models some experimentally observed features, such as microenvironment, niche partitioning and phenotype propagation. In this article we show how this idea can be supported by computational methods useful to successfully integrate, analyze and model large data sets, combining cross-sectional and longitudinal information on clinical, environmental and omics data of healthy subjects and patients to provide new multidimensional biomarkers capable of distinguishing between different pathological conditions, e.g. healthy versus unhealthy state, physiological versus pathological aging.

Use of systems biology to decipher host-pathogen interaction networks and predict biomarkers

In systems biology, researchers aim to understand complex biological systems as a whole, which is often achieved by mathematical modelling and the analyses of high-throughput data. In this review, we give an overview of medical applications of systems biology approaches with special focus on host-pathogen interactions. After introducing general ideas of systems biology, we focus on (1) the detection of putative biomarkers for improved diagnosis and support of therapeutic decisions, (2) network modelling for the identification of regulatory interactions between cellular molecules to reveal putative drug targets and (3) module discovery for the detection of phenotype-specific modules in molecular interaction networks. Biomarker detection applies supervised machine learning methods utilizing high-throughput data (e.g. single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) detection, RNA-seq, proteomics) and clinical data. We demonstrate structural analysis of molecular networks, especially by identification of disease modules as a novel strategy, and discuss possible applications to host-pathogen interactions. Pioneering work was done to predict molecular host-pathogen interactions networks based on dual RNA-seq data. However, currently this network modelling is restricted to a small number of genes. With increasing number and quality of databases and data repositories, the prediction of large-scale networks will also be feasible that can used for multidimensional diagnosis and decision support for prevention and therapy of diseases. Finally, we outline further perspective issues such as support of personalized medicine with high-throughput data and generation of multiscale host-pathogen interaction models.

Clinical implications of omics and systems medicine: focus on predictive and individualized treatment

Many patients with common diseases do not respond to treatment. This is a key challenge to modern health care, which causes both suffering and enormous costs. One important reason for the lack of treatment response is that common diseases are associated with altered interactions between thousands of genes, in combinations that differ between subgroups of patients who do or do not respond to a given treatment. Such subgroups, or even distinct disease entities, have been described recently in asthma, diabetes, autoimmune diseases and cancer. High-throughput techniques (omics) allow identification and characterization of such subgroups or entities. This may have important clinical implications, such as identification of diagnostic markers for individualized medicine, as well as new therapeutic targets for patients who do not respond to existing drugs. For example, whole-genome sequencing may be applied to more accurately guide treatment of neurodevelopmental diseases, or to identify drugs specifically targeting mutated genes in cancer. A study published in 2015 showed that 28% of hepatocellular carcinomas contained mutated genes that potentially could be targeted by drugs already approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. A translational study, which is described in detail, showed how combined omics, computational, functional and clinical studies could identify and validate a novel diagnostic and therapeutic candidate gene in allergy. Another important clinical implication is the identification of potential diagnostic markers and therapeutic targets for predictive and preventative medicine. By combining computational and experimental methods, early disease regulators may be identified and potentially used to predict and treat disease before it becomes symptomatic. Systems medicine is an emerging discipline, which may contribute to such developments through combining omics with computational, functional and clinical studies. The aims of this review are to provide a brief introduction to systems medicine and discuss how it may contribute to the clinical implementation of individualized treatment, using clinically relevant examples.

Systems Medicine: Sketching the Landscape

To understand the meaning of the term Systems Medicine and to distinguish it from seemingly related other expressions currently in use, such as precision, personalized, -omics, or big data medicine, its underlying history and development into present time needs to be highlighted. Having this development in mind, it becomes evident that Systems Medicine is a genuine concept as well as a novel way of tackling the manifold complexity that occurs in nowadays clinical medicine-and not just a rebranding of what has previously been done in the past. So looking back it seems clear to many in the field that Systems Medicine has its origin in an integrative method to unravel biocomplexity, namely, Systems Biology. Here scientist by now gained useful experience that is on the verge toward implementation in clinical research and practice.Systems Medicine and Systems Biology have the same underlying theoretical principle in systems-based thinking-a methodology to understand complexity that can be traced back to ancient Greece. During the last decade, however, and due to a rapid methodological development in the life sciences and computing/IT technologies, Systems Biology has evolved from a scientific concept into an independent discipline most competent to tackle key questions of biocomplexity-with the potential to transform medicine and how it will be practiced in the future. To understand this process in more detail, the following section will thus give a short summary of the foundation of systems-based thinking and the different developmental stages including systems theory, the development of modern Systems Biology, and its transition into clinical practice. These are the components to pave the way toward Systems Medicine.

Implementing systems medicine within healthcare

The cause of a complex disease cannot be pinpointed to a single origin; rather, a highly complex network of many factors that interact on different levels over time and space is disturbed. This complexity requires novel approaches to diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. To foster the necessary shift to a pro-active systems medicine, proof-of-concept studies are needed. Here, we highlight several systems approaches that have been shown to work within the field of respiratory medicine, and we propose the next steps for broader implementation.

Managing severe asthma in adults: lessons from the ERS/ATS guidelines

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the latest guidelines on severe asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

An updated definition of severe asthma is provided together with the evaluation steps necessary to reach a diagnosis of severe asthma. The importance of phenotyping is emphasized, and recommendations are provided for therapies specifically directed for severe asthma.

SUMMARY

Severe asthma is widely recognized as a major unmet need. It is defined as asthma that requires treatment with high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and a second controller and/or systemic corticosteroid to prevent it from becoming 'uncontrolled' or that remains 'uncontrolled' despite this therapy. Severe asthma is a heterogeneous condition that consists of phenotypes such as eosinophilic asthma. More phenotypes need to be defined. Evaluation of the patient referred to as having severe or difficult-to-control asthma must take into account adherence to treatment, comorbidities and associated factors including side effects from therapies. These need to be addressed. Recommendations on the use of sputum eosinophil count and exhaled nitric oxide to guide therapy are presented. Treatment with anti-IgE antibody, methotrexate, macrolide antibiotics, antifungal agents and bronchial thermoplasty is reviewed and recommendations made. Research efforts into phenotyping of severe asthma will provide both biomarker-driven approaches and newer effective therapies to severe asthma management.

Personalized respiratory medicine: exploring the horizon, addressing the issues. Summary of a BRN-AJRCCM workshop held in Barcelona on June 12, 2014

This Pulmonary Perspective summarizes the content and main conclusions of an international workshop on personalized respiratory medicine coorganized by the Barcelona Respiratory Network ( www.brn.cat ) and the AJRCCM in June 2014. It discusses (1) its definition and historical, social, legal, and ethical aspects; (2) the view from different disciplines, including basic science, epidemiology, bioinformatics, and network/systems medicine; (3) the bottlenecks and opportunities identified by some currently ongoing projects; and (4) the implications for the individual, the healthcare system and the pharmaceutical industry. The authors hope that, although it is not a systematic review on the subject, this document can be a useful reference for researchers, clinicians, healthcare managers, policy-makers, and industry parties interested in personalized respiratory medicine.

Modules, networks and systems medicine for understanding disease and aiding diagnosis

Many common diseases, such as asthma, diabetes or obesity, involve altered interactions between thousands of genes. High-throughput techniques (omics) allow identification of such genes and their products, but functional understanding is a formidable challenge. Network-based analyses of omics data have identified modules of disease-associated genes that have been used to obtain both a systems level and a molecular understanding of disease mechanisms. For example, in allergy a module was used to find a novel candidate gene that was validated by functional and clinical studies. Such analyses play important roles in systems medicine. This is an emerging discipline that aims to gain a translational understanding of the complex mechanisms underlying common diseases. In this review, we will explain and provide examples of how network-based analyses of omics data, in combination with functional and clinical studies, are aiding our understanding of disease, as well as helping to prioritize diagnostic markers or therapeutic candidate genes. Such analyses involve significant problems and limitations, which will be discussed. We also highlight the steps needed for clinical implementation.