A method of inferring the relationship between Biomedical entities through correlation analysis on text

Abstract

BackgroundOne of the most important processes in a machine learning-based natural language processing is to represent words. The one-hot representation that has been commonly used has a large size of vector and assumes that the features that make up the vector are independent of each other. On the other hand, it is known that word embedding has a great effect in estimating the similarity between words because it expresses the meaning of the word well. In this study, we try to clarify the correlation between various terms in the biomedical texts based on the excellent ability of estimating similarity between words shown by word embedding. Therefore, we used word embedding to find new biomarkers and microorganisms related to a specific diseases.MethodsIn this study, we try to analyze the correlation between diseases-markers and diseases-microorganisms. First, we need to construct a corpus that seems to be related to them. To do this, we extract the titles and abstracts from the biomedical texts on the PubMed site. Second, we express diseases, markers, and microorganisms’ terms in word embedding using Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA). CCA is a statistical based methodology that has a very good performance on vector dimension reduction. Finally, we tried to estimate the relationship between diseases-markers pairs and diseases-microorganisms pairs by measuring their similarity.ResultsIn the experiment, we tried to confirm the correlation derived through word embedding using Google Scholar search results. Of the top 20 highly correlated disease-marker pairs, about 85% of the pairs have actually undergone a lot of research as a result of Google Scholars search. Conversely, for 85% of the 20 pairs with the lowest correlation, we could not actually find any other study to determine the relationship between the disease and the marker. This trend was similar for disease-microbe pairs.ConclusionsThe correlation between diseases and markers and diseases and microorganisms calculated through word embedding reflects actual research trends. If the word-embedding correlation is high, but there are not many published actual studies, additional research can be proposed for the pair.

How can natural language processing help model informed drug development?: a review

“…Biomarkers also serve as surrogate endpoints in early-phase trials. 8 , 92 , 93 Biomarker and disease names are identified in free-text data using NER and the frequency of their co-occurrences. The relationship between disease and biomarkers can be understood using word embedding and similarity approaches.…”

Development of a dynamic network biomarkers method and its application for detecting the tipping point of prior disease development

“…Such molecular markers are usually obtained from the analysis of disease-normal sample pairs. These markers may be mutation sites, mutant genes, or genes with significantly high/low expression or significant changes in characteristic metabolites [3] . Some markers can define the type of disease and are of great value to the choice of treatment methods for patients.…”

Challenges in the construction of knowledge bases for human microbiome-disease associations

“…In 2018, Song et al [21] captured the relationships between diseases (hepatitis, conjunctivitis etc. ), biomarkers (Prolactin, apoa-I, etc.…”

“…Ma et al [19] illustrate the types of consistencies that are exhibited by relationships within the database. Song et al [21], not surprisingly, demonstrate that disease microbe co-mentions in scientific publications imply the actual correlation between the two. Janssens et al [24] bring about formal rigor in the identification of disease and microbial entities using specific ontologies.…”

“…Potentially, we may apply either a knowledge-based approach (e.g., [93]) or a data-driven approach (e.g., [94]) to define and classify microbe-disease associations. As is the norm, Janssens et al [24], Song et al [21], and Ma et al [19] model microbe-disease associations as qualitative directional (reduced vs. elevated) relationships only. This limits their usability in situations where disease progression may be associated with microbial blooms and possible cyclical replacements of communities of organisms.…”