SUMMARY: With the rapid growth of genetic data linked to electronic health record (EHR) data in huge cohorts, large-scale phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) have become powerful discovery tools in biomedical research. PheWAS is an analysis method to study phenotype associations utilizing longitudinal EHR data. Previous PheWAS packages were developed mostly with smaller datasets and with earlier PheWAS approaches. PheTK was designed to simplify analysis and efficiently handle biobank-scale data. PheTK uses multithreading and supports a full PheWAS workflow including extraction of data from OMOP databases and Hail matrix tables as well as PheWAS analysis for both phecode version 1.2 and phecodeX. Benchmarking results showed PheTK took 64% less time than the R PheWAS package to complete the same workflow. PheTK can be run locally or on cloud platforms such as the All of Us Researcher Workbench (All of Us) or the UK Biobank (UKB) Research Analysis Platform (RAP). AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The PheTK package is freely available on the Python Package Index, on GitHub under GNU General Public License (GPL-3) at https://github.com/nhgritctran/PheTK, and on Zenodo, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.14217954, at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14217954. PheTK is implemented in Python and platform independent.

OBJECTIVE: The All of Us Research Program (All of Us) aims to recruit over a million participants to further precision medicine. Essential to the verification of biobanks is a replication of known associations to establish validity. Here, we evaluated how well All of Us data replicated known cigarette smoking associations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We defined smoking exposure as follows: (1) an EHR Smoking exposure that used International Classification of Disease codes; (2) participant provided information (PPI) Ever Smoking; and, (3) PPI Current Smoking, both from the lifestyle survey. We performed a phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) for each smoking exposure measurement type. For each, we compared the effect sizes derived from the PheWAS to published meta-analyses that studied cigarette smoking from PubMed. We defined two levels of replication of meta-analyses: (1) nominally replicated: which required agreement of direction of effect size, and (2) fully replicated: which required overlap of confidence intervals. RESULTS: PheWASes with EHR Smoking, PPI Ever Smoking, and PPI Current Smoking revealed 736, 492, and 639 phenome-wide significant associations, respectively. We identified 165 meta-analyses representing 99 distinct phenotypes that could be matched to EHR phenotypes. At P < .05, 74 were nominally replicated and 55 were fully replicated. At P < 2.68 × 10-5 (Bonferroni threshold), 58 were nominally replicated and 40 were fully replicated. DISCUSSION: Most phenotypes found in published meta-analyses associated with smoking were nominally replicated in All of Us. Both survey and EHR definitions for smoking produced similar results. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the feasibility of studying common exposures using All of Us data.

Electronic health record (EHR) algorithms for defining patient cohorts are commonly shared as free-text descriptions that require human intervention both to interpret and implement. We developed the Phenotype Execution and Modeling Architecture (PhEMA, http://projectphema.org) to author and execute standardized computable phenotype algorithms. With PhEMA, we converted an algorithm for benign prostatic hyperplasia, developed for the electronic Medical Records and Genomics network (eMERGE), into a standards-based computable format. Eight sites (7 within eMERGE) received the computable algorithm, and 6 successfully executed it against local data warehouses and/or i2b2 instances. Blinded random chart review of cases selected by the computable algorithm shows PPV ≥90%, and 3 out of 5 sites had >90% overlap of selected cases when comparing the computable algorithm to their original eMERGE implementation. This case study demonstrates potential use of PhEMA computable representations to automate phenotyping across different EHR systems, but also highlights some ongoing challenges.

OBJECTIVE: Phenotyping algorithms applied to electronic health record (EHR) data enable investigators to identify large cohorts for clinical and genomic research. Algorithm development is often iterative, depends on fallible investigator intuition, and is time- and labor-intensive. We developed and evaluated 4 types of phenotyping algorithms and categories of EHR information to identify hypertensive individuals and controls and provide a portable module for implementation at other sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the EHRs of 631 individuals followed at Vanderbilt for hypertension status. We developed features and phenotyping algorithms of increasing complexity. Input categories included International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD9) codes, medications, vital signs, narrative-text search results, and Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) concepts extracted using natural language processing (NLP). We developed a module and tested portability by replicating 10 of the best-performing algorithms at the Marshfield Clinic. RESULTS: Random forests using billing codes, medications, vitals, and concepts had the best performance with a median area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.976. Normalized sums of all 4 categories also performed well (0.959 AUC). The best non-NLP algorithm combined normalized ICD9 codes, medications, and blood pressure readings with a median AUC of 0.948. Blood pressure cutoffs or ICD9 code counts alone had AUCs of 0.854 and 0.908, respectively. Marshfield Clinic results were similar. CONCLUSION: This work shows that billing codes or blood pressure readings alone yield good hypertension classification performance. However, even simple combinations of input categories improve performance. The most complex algorithms classified hypertension with excellent recall and precision.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the phenotyping performance of three major electronic health record (EHR) components: International Classification of Disease (ICD) diagnosis codes, primary notes, and specific medications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted the evaluation using de-identified Vanderbilt EHR data. We preselected ten diseases: atrial fibrillation, Alzheimer's disease, breast cancer, gout, human immunodeficiency virus infection, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, and types 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus. For each disease, patients were classified into seven categories based on the presence of evidence in diagnosis codes, primary notes, and specific medications. Twenty-five patients per disease category (a total number of 175 patients for each disease, 1750 patients for all ten diseases) were randomly selected for manual chart review. Review results were used to estimate the positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, andF-score for each EHR component alone and in combination. RESULTS: The PPVs of single components were inconsistent and inadequate for accurately phenotyping (0.06-0.71). Using two or more ICD codes improved the average PPV to 0.84. We observed a more stable and higher accuracy when using at least two components (mean ± standard deviation: 0.91 ± 0.08). Primary notes offered the best sensitivity (0.77). The sensitivity of ICD codes was 0.67. Again, two or more components provided a reasonably high and stable sensitivity (0.59 ± 0.16). Overall, the best performance (Fscore: 0.70 ± 0.12) was achieved by using two or more components. Although the overall performance of using ICD codes (0.67 ± 0.14) was only slightly lower than using two or more components, its PPV (0.71 ± 0.13) is substantially worse (0.91 ± 0.08). CONCLUSION: Multiple EHR components provide a more consistent and higher performance than a single one for the selected phenotypes. We suggest considering multiple EHR components for future phenotyping design in order to obtain an ideal result.

OBJECTIVES: To improve the accuracy of mining structured and unstructured components of the electronic medical record (EMR) by adding temporal features to automatically identify patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with methotrexate-induced liver transaminase abnormalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Codified information and a string-matching algorithm were applied to a RA cohort of 5903 patients from Partners HealthCare to select 1130 patients with potential liver toxicity. Supervised machine learning was applied as our key method. For features, Apache clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES) was used to extract standard vocabulary from relevant sections of the unstructured clinical narrative. Temporal features were further extracted to assess the temporal relevance of event mentions with regard to the date of transaminase abnormality. All features were encapsulated in a 3-month-long episode for classification. Results were summarized at patient level in a training set (N=480 patients) and evaluated against a test set (N=120 patients). RESULTS: The system achieved positive predictive value (PPV) 0.756, sensitivity 0.919, F1 score 0.829 on the test set, which was significantly better than the best baseline system (PPV 0.590, sensitivity 0.703, F1 score 0.642). Our innovations, which included framing the phenotype problem as an episode-level classification task, and adding temporal information, all proved highly effective. CONCLUSIONS: Automated methotrexate-induced liver toxicity phenotype discovery for patients with RA based on structured and unstructured information in the EMR shows accurate results. Our work demonstrates that adding temporal features significantly improved classification results.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) are increasingly used for clinical and translational research through the creation of phenotype algorithms. Currently, phenotype algorithms are most commonly represented as noncomputable descriptive documents and knowledge artifacts that detail the protocols for querying diagnoses, symptoms, procedures, medications, and/or text-driven medical concepts, and are primarily meant for human comprehension. We present desiderata for developing a computable phenotype representation model (PheRM). METHODS: A team of clinicians and informaticians reviewed common features for multisite phenotype algorithms published in PheKB.org and existing phenotype representation platforms. We also evaluated well-known diagnostic criteria and clinical decision-making guidelines to encompass a broader category of algorithms. RESULTS: We propose 10 desired characteristics for a flexible, computable PheRM: (1) structure clinical data into queryable forms; (2) recommend use of a common data model, but also support customization for the variability and availability of EHR data among sites; (3) support both human-readable and computable representations of phenotype algorithms; (4) implement set operations and relational algebra for modeling phenotype algorithms; (5) represent phenotype criteria with structured rules; (6) support defining temporal relations between events; (7) use standardized terminologies and ontologies, and facilitate reuse of value sets; (8) define representations for text searching and natural language processing; (9) provide interfaces for external software algorithms; and (10) maintain backward compatibility. CONCLUSION: A computable PheRM is needed for true phenotype portability and reliability across different EHR products and healthcare systems. These desiderata are a guide to inform the establishment and evolution of EHR phenotype algorithm authoring platforms and languages.

OBJECTIVE: To review and evaluate available software tools for electronic health record-driven phenotype authoring in order to identify gaps and needs for future development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Candidate phenotype authoring tools were identified through (1) literature search in four publication databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus) and (2) a web search. A collection of tools was compiled and reviewed after the searches. A survey was designed and distributed to the developers of the reviewed tools to discover their functionalities and features. RESULTS: Twenty-four different phenotype authoring tools were identified and reviewed. Developers of 16 of these identified tools completed the evaluation survey (67% response rate). The surveyed tools showed commonalities but also varied in their capabilities in algorithm representation, logic functions, data support and software extensibility, search functions, user interface, and data outputs. DISCUSSION: Positive trends identified in the evaluation included: algorithms can be represented in both computable and human readable formats; and most tools offer a web interface for easy access. However, issues were also identified: many tools were lacking advanced logic functions for authoring complex algorithms; the ability to construct queries that leveraged un-structured data was not widely implemented; and many tools had limited support for plug-ins or external analytic software. CONCLUSIONS: Existing phenotype authoring tools could enable clinical researchers to work with electronic health record data more efficiently, but gaps still exist in terms of the functionalities of such tools. The present work can serve as a reference point for the future development of similar tools.