Investigating ADR mechanisms with knowledge graph mining and explainable AI

Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) are characterized within randomized clinical trials and postmarketing pharmacovigilance, but their molecular mechanism remains unknown in most cases. Aside from clinical trials, many elements of knowledge about drug ingredients are available in open-access knowledge graphs. In addition, drug classifications that label drugs as either causative or not for several ADRs, have been established. We propose to mine knowledge graphs for identifying biomolecular features that may enable reproducing automatically expert classifications that distinguish drug causative or not for a given type of ADR. In an explainable AI perspective, we explore simple classification techniques such as Decision Trees and Classification Rules because they provide human-readable models, which explain the classification itself, but may also provide elements of explanation for molecular mechanisms behind ADRs. In summary, we mine a knowledge graph for features; we train classifiers at distinguishing, drugs associated or not with ADRs; we isolate features that are both efficient in reproducing expert classifications and interpretable by experts (i.e., Gene Ontology terms, drug targets, or pathway names); and we manually evaluate how they may be explanatory. Extracted features reproduce with a good fidelity classifications of drugs causative or not for DILI and SCAR. Experts fully agreed that 73% and 38% of the most discriminative features are possibly explanatory for DILI and SCAR, respectively; and partially agreed (2/3) for 90% and 77% of them. Knowledge graphs provide diverse features to enable simple and explainable models to distinguish between drugs that are causative or not for ADRs. In addition to explaining classifications, most discriminative features appear to be good candidates for investigating ADR mechanisms further.

Mining for adverse drug events with formal concept analysis

The pharmacovigilance databases consist of several case reports involving drugs and adverse events (AEs). Some methods are applied consistently to highlight all signals, i.e. all statistically significant associations between a drug and an AE. These methods are appropriate for verification of more complex relationships involving one or several drug(s) and AE(s) (e.g; syndromes or interactions) but do not address the identification of them. We propose a method for the extraction of these relationships based on Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) associated with disproportionality measures. This method identifies all sets of drugs and AEs which are potential signals, syndromes or interactions. Compared to a previous experience of disproportionality analysis without FCA, the addition of FCA was more efficient for identifying false positives related to concomitant drugs.