Topological network analysis of patient similarity for precision management of acute blood pressure in spinal cord injury

  1. Abel Torres Espín
  2. Jenny Haefeli
  3. Reza Ehsanian
  4. Dolores Torres
  5. Carlos A de Almeida
  6. J Russell Huie
  7. Austin Chou
  8. Dmitriy Morozov
  9. Nicole Sanderson
  10. Benjamin Dirlikov
  11. Catherine G Suen
  12. Jessica L Nielson
  13. Nikolaos Kyritsis
  14. Debra D Hemmerle
  15. Jason Talbott
  16. Geoff T Manley
  17. Sanjay S Dhall
  18. William D Whetstone
  19. Jacqueline C Bresnahan
  20. Michael S Beattie
  21. Stephen L McKenna
  22. Jonathan Z Pan  Is a corresponding author
  23. Adam Ferguson  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, San Francisco, United States
  2. University of California San Francisco, United States
  3. University of New Mexico School of Medicine, United States
  4. Lawrence Berkley National Lab, United States
  5. Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, United States
  6. University of Minnesota, United States

Abstract

Background:

Predicting neurological recovery after spinal cord injury (SCI) is challenging. Using topological data analysis, we have previously shown that mean arterial pressure (MAP) during SCI surgery predicts long-term functional recovery in rodent models, motivating the present multicenter study in patients.

Methods:

Intra-operative monitoring records and neurological outcome data were extracted (n=118 patients). We built a similarity network of patients from a low-dimensional space embedded using a non-linear algorithm, Isomap, and ensured topological extraction using persistent homology metrics. Confirmatory analysis was conducted through regression methods.

Results:

Network analysis suggested that time outside of an optimum MAP range (hypotension or hypertension) during surgery was associated with lower likelihood of neurological recovery at hospital discharge. Logistic and LASSO regression confirmed these findings, revealing an optimal MAP range of 76-[104-117] mmHg associated with neurological recovery.

Conclusion:

We show that deviation from this optimal MAP range during SCI surgery predicts lower probability of neurological recovery and suggest new targets for therapeutic intervention.

Funding:

NIH/NINDS: R01NS088475 (ARF); R01NS122888 (ARF); UH3NS106899 (ARF); Department of Veterans Affairs: 1I01RX002245 (ARF), I01RX002787 (ARF); Wings for Life Foundation (ARF)(ATE); Craig H. Neilsen Foundation (ARF); and DOD: SC150198 (MSB); SC190233 (MSB).

Data availability

Source data has been deposited to the Open Data Commons for Spinal Cord Injury (odc-sci.org; RRID:SCR_016673) under the accession number ODC-SCI:245 (doi: 10.34945/F5R59) and ODC-SCI:246 (doi: 10.34945/F5MG68)

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Abel Torres Espín

    Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jenny Haefeli

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Reza Ehsanian

    Neurosurgery, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Alburquerque, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dolores Torres

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Carlos A de Almeida

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. J Russell Huie

    Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Austin Chou

    Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Dmitriy Morozov

    Data analytics and Visualization group, Lawrence Berkley National Lab, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Nicole Sanderson

    Data analytics and Visualization group, Lawrence Berkley National Lab, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Benjamin Dirlikov

    Rehabilitation Research Center, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, San Jose, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Catherine G Suen

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Jessica L Nielson

    Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Nikolaos Kyritsis

    Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francsico, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7801-5796
  14. Debra D Hemmerle

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2796-6107
  15. Jason Talbott

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Geoff T Manley

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Sanjay S Dhall

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. William D Whetstone

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Jacqueline C Bresnahan

    Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Michael S Beattie

    Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Stephen L McKenna

    Rehabilitation Research Center, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, San Jose, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  22. Jonathan Z Pan

    Neurological surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    jonathan.pan@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  23. Adam Ferguson

    Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    adam.ferguson@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7102-1608

Funding

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS088475)

  • Adam Ferguson

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (UG3NS106899)

  • Adam Ferguson

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (1I01RX002245)

  • Adam Ferguson

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (I01RX002787)

  • Adam Ferguson

Wings for Life Foundation

  • Abel Torres Espín

Wings for Life Foundation

  • Adam Ferguson

Craig H. Neilsen Foundation

  • Adam Ferguson

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: This study constitutes a retrospective data analysis. All data was de-identified before pre-processing and analysis. Protocols for retrospective data extraction were approved by Institutional Research Board (IRB) under protocol numbers 11-07639 and 11-06997.

Copyright

© 2021, Torres Espín et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,868
    views
  • 272
    downloads
  • 19
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Abel Torres Espín
  2. Jenny Haefeli
  3. Reza Ehsanian
  4. Dolores Torres
  5. Carlos A de Almeida
  6. J Russell Huie
  7. Austin Chou
  8. Dmitriy Morozov
  9. Nicole Sanderson
  10. Benjamin Dirlikov
  11. Catherine G Suen
  12. Jessica L Nielson
  13. Nikolaos Kyritsis
  14. Debra D Hemmerle
  15. Jason Talbott
  16. Geoff T Manley
  17. Sanjay S Dhall
  18. William D Whetstone
  19. Jacqueline C Bresnahan
  20. Michael S Beattie
  21. Stephen L McKenna
  22. Jonathan Z Pan
  23. Adam Ferguson
(2021)
Topological network analysis of patient similarity for precision management of acute blood pressure in spinal cord injury
eLife 10:e68015.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.68015

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.68015

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Gaetan De Waele, Gerben Menschaert, Willem Waegeman
    Research Article

    Timely and effective use of antimicrobial drugs can improve patient outcomes, as well as help safeguard against resistance development. Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) is currently routinely used in clinical diagnostics for rapid species identification. Mining additional data from said spectra in the form of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profiles is, therefore, highly promising. Such AMR profiles could serve as a drop-in solution for drastically improving treatment efficiency, effectiveness, and costs. This study endeavors to develop the first machine learning models capable of predicting AMR profiles for the whole repertoire of species and drugs encountered in clinical microbiology. The resulting models can be interpreted as drug recommender systems for infectious diseases. We find that our dual-branch method delivers considerably higher performance compared to previous approaches. In addition, experiments show that the models can be efficiently fine-tuned to data from other clinical laboratories. MALDI-TOF-based AMR recommender systems can, hence, greatly extend the value of MALDI-TOF MS for clinical diagnostics. All code supporting this study is distributed on PyPI and is packaged at https://github.com/gdewael/maldi-nn.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Sanjarbek Hudaiberdiev, Ivan Ovcharenko
    Research Article

    Enhancers and promoters are classically considered to be bound by a small set of transcription factors (TFs) in a sequence-specific manner. This assumption has come under increasing skepticism as the datasets of ChIP-seq assays of TFs have expanded. In particular, high-occupancy target (HOT) loci attract hundreds of TFs with often no detectable correlation between ChIP-seq peaks and DNA-binding motif presence. Here, we used a set of 1003 TF ChIP-seq datasets (HepG2, K562, H1) to analyze the patterns of ChIP-seq peak co-occurrence in combination with functional genomics datasets. We identified 43,891 HOT loci forming at the promoter (53%) and enhancer (47%) regions. HOT promoters regulate housekeeping genes, whereas HOT enhancers are involved in tissue-specific process regulation. HOT loci form the foundation of human super-enhancers and evolve under strong negative selection, with some of these loci being located in ultraconserved regions. Sequence-based classification analysis of HOT loci suggested that their formation is driven by the sequence features, and the density of mapped ChIP-seq peaks across TF-bound loci correlates with sequence features and the expression level of flanking genes. Based on the affinities to bind to promoters and enhancers we detected five distinct clusters of TFs that form the core of the HOT loci. We report an abundance of HOT loci in the human genome and a commitment of 51% of all TF ChIP-seq binding events to HOT locus formation thus challenging the classical model of enhancer activity and propose a model of HOT locus formation based on the existence of large transcriptional condensates.