This is a Human Analytics Longitudinal Observational (HALO) Study. A Phase I Study to Analyze All Available Biomarkers and Determinants of Health to Increase Diagnostic Accuracy While Reducing the Time to Diagnosis of Disease.
Summary
Discover, optimize, standardize, and validate clinical-trial measures and biomarkers used to diagnose and differentiate cardiovascular, oncologic, neurologic, and other diseases and disorders. Specifically, our research study endeavors to improve disease and disorder diagnosis to the earliest clinical states, in preclinical states, and to develop ensemble multivariate biomarker risk scores leading to cardiovascular, oncologic, neurologic, and other diseases and disorders. Additionally, the study aims to: * Evaluate data analysis techniques to improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce time to diagnosis. * Evaluate data analysis techniques to improve risk stratification for participants through machine learning algorithms. * Direct participants to relevant and applicable clinical trials.
Detailed description
Electronic medical records contain data that may indicate increased risk for certain diseases and disorders, but clinicians cannot easily discern the subtle patterns required to change their diagnostic and treatment patterns. This study seeks to use machine learning and data analysis techniques to increase diagnostic confidence and reduce time-to-diagnosis related to cardiovascular, oncologic, neurologic, and other diseases and disorders. The study endeavors to develop ensemble multivariate biomarker risk scores to predict future development of diseases and disorders, improve diagnosis in preclinical states and increase diagnostic accuracy in the earliest clinical states. We also aim to evaluate data analysis techniques to improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce time to diagnosis, improve risk stratification for participants through machine learning algorithms and direct participants to relevant and applicable clinical trials upon physician review, approval and recommendation.
Arms & interventions
- Otherno interventions will be performed (observational)
Not applicable. (no interventions will be performed with this observational study
Outcome measures
Primary
Prostate cancer Gleason score
Measure a patient's prostate cancer Gleason score for patients with a prostate cancer diagnosis and record the measurement again at 3, 6, 9 months and annually for 5 years after treatment. We will use the pathology report submitted by the pathologist. The Gleason Score ranges from 1-5 and describes how much the cancer from a biopsy looks like healthy tissue (lower score) or abnormal tissue (higher score).
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
Prostate cancer ISUP grade group
Measure a patient's prostate cancer ISUP grade group for patients with a prostate cancer diagnosis and record the measurement again at 3, 6, 9 months and annually for 5 years after treatment. We will use the pathology report submitted by the pathologist. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) guidelines grades the cancer between 1 and 5 depending on the Gleason score. The lower the grade the less likely the cancer is to spread.
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
Prostate cancer staging parameters
TNM stage and metastasis-free survival, documentation of tumor, lymph node and osseous involvement
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
Prostate cancer specific mortality
Proportion of men who expire directly due to prostate cancer
Time frame: Up to 5 years
Secondary
Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
Erectile function
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
Emotional well-being
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
Incontinence level
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
PI-RADS category
Time frame: Up to 5 years after treatment
Eligibility criteria
Study locations (1)
Desert Medical Imaging
Indian Wells, California, 92210
References
- Weng SF, Reps J, Kai J, Garibaldi JM, Qureshi N. Can machine-learning improve cardiovascular risk prediction using routine clinical data? PLoS One. 2017 Apr 4;12(4):e0174944. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174944. eCollection 2017.(PubMed)
- Wang X, Oldani MJ, Zhao X, Huang X, Qian D. A review of cancer risk prediction models with genetic variants. Cancer Inform. 2014 Sep 21;13(Suppl 2):19-28. doi: 10.4137/CIN.S13788. eCollection 2014.(PubMed)