Biomarkers and neurobehavioral diagnosis

Q2 Medicine
Joshua B. Ewen , William Z. Potter , John A. Sweeney
{"title":"Biomarkers and neurobehavioral diagnosis","authors":"Joshua B. Ewen ,&nbsp;William Z. Potter ,&nbsp;John A. Sweeney","doi":"10.1016/j.bionps.2020.100029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Our current diagnostic methods for treatment planning in Psychiatry and Neurodevelopmental Disabilities leave room for improvement, and null results in clinical trials in these fields may be a result of insufficient tools for patient stratification. Great hope has been placed in novel technologies to improve clinical and trial outcomes, but we have yet to see a substantial change in clinical practice. As we examine attempts at biomarker validation within these fields, we find that it may be the diagnoses themselves that fall short. We now need to improve neuropsychiatric nosologies with a focus on validity based not solely on behavioral features, but on a synthesis that includes genetic and biological data as well. The eventual goal is diagnostic biomarkers and diagnoses themselves based on distinct mechanisms, but such an understanding of the causal relationship across levels of analysis is likely to be elusive for some time. Rather, we propose an approach in the near-term that deconstructs diagnosis into a series of independent, empiric and clinically relevant associations among a single, defined patient group, a single biomarker, a single intervention and a single clinical outcome. Incremental study across patient groups, interventions, outcomes and modalities will lead to a more interdigitated network of knowledge, and correlations in metrics across levels of analysis will eventually give way to the causal understanding that will allow for mechanistically based diagnoses.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":52767,"journal":{"name":"Biomarkers in Neuropsychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bionps.2020.100029","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomarkers in Neuropsychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666144620300198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Our current diagnostic methods for treatment planning in Psychiatry and Neurodevelopmental Disabilities leave room for improvement, and null results in clinical trials in these fields may be a result of insufficient tools for patient stratification. Great hope has been placed in novel technologies to improve clinical and trial outcomes, but we have yet to see a substantial change in clinical practice. As we examine attempts at biomarker validation within these fields, we find that it may be the diagnoses themselves that fall short. We now need to improve neuropsychiatric nosologies with a focus on validity based not solely on behavioral features, but on a synthesis that includes genetic and biological data as well. The eventual goal is diagnostic biomarkers and diagnoses themselves based on distinct mechanisms, but such an understanding of the causal relationship across levels of analysis is likely to be elusive for some time. Rather, we propose an approach in the near-term that deconstructs diagnosis into a series of independent, empiric and clinically relevant associations among a single, defined patient group, a single biomarker, a single intervention and a single clinical outcome. Incremental study across patient groups, interventions, outcomes and modalities will lead to a more interdigitated network of knowledge, and correlations in metrics across levels of analysis will eventually give way to the causal understanding that will allow for mechanistically based diagnoses.

生物标志物和神经行为诊断
我们目前对精神病学和神经发育障碍治疗计划的诊断方法还有改进的空间,这些领域的临床试验无效结果可能是患者分层工具不足的结果。人们对改善临床和试验结果的新技术寄予了极大的希望,但我们尚未看到临床实践中的实质性变化。当我们检查这些领域中生物标志物验证的尝试时,我们发现可能是诊断本身不足。我们现在需要改进神经精神病学,不仅要关注基于行为特征的有效性,还要关注包括遗传和生物学数据在内的综合有效性。最终目标是诊断生物标记物和基于不同机制的诊断本身,但这种对跨分析水平因果关系的理解可能在一段时间内难以捉摸。相反,我们在近期提出了一种方法,将诊断解构为一系列独立的、经验性的和临床相关的关联,这些关联存在于单一的、明确的患者群体、单一的生物标志物、单一的干预和单一的临床结果中。跨患者群体、干预措施、结果和模式的增量研究将导致一个更加数字化的知识网络,跨分析水平的指标相关性最终将让位于因果理解,从而允许基于机械的诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biomarkers in Neuropsychiatry
Biomarkers in Neuropsychiatry Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信