Cardiovascular Medicine, Genetics and Network Medicine Divisions, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Hale 7016, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Mamm Genome. 2019 Aug;30(7-8):201-211. doi: 10.1007/s00335-019-09810-7. Epub 2019 Aug 19.
The central concept underlying precision medicine is a mechanistic understanding of each disease and its response to therapy sufficient to direct a specific intervention. To execute on this vision requires parsing incompletely defined disease syndromes into discrete mechanistic subsets and developing interventions to precisely address each of these etiologically distinct entities. This will require substantial adjustment of traditional paradigms which have tended to aggregate high-level phenotypes with very different etiologies. In the current environment, where diagnoses are not mechanistic, drug development has become so expensive that it is now impractical to imagine the cost-effective creation of new interventions for many prevalent chronic conditions. The vision of precision medicine also argues for a much more seamless integration of research and development with clinical care, where shared taxonomies will enable every clinical interaction to inform our collective understanding of disease mechanisms and drug responses. Ideally, this would be executed in ways that drive real-time and real-world discovery, innovation, translation, and implementation. Only in oncology, where at least some of the biology is accessible through surgical excision of the diseased tissue or liquid biopsy, has "co-clinical" modeling proven feasible. In most common germline disorders, while genetics often reveal the causal mutations, there still remain substantial barriers to efficient disease modeling. Aggregation of similar disorders under single diagnostic labels has directly contributed to the paucity of etiologic and mechanistic understanding by directly reducing the resolution of any subsequent studies. Existing clinical phenotypes are typically anatomic, physiologic, or histologic, and result in a substantial mismatch in information content between the phenomes in humans or in animal 'models' and the variation in the genome. This lack of one-to-one mapping of discrete mechanisms between disease and animal models causes a failure of translation and is one form of 'phenotype gap.' In this review, we will focus on the origins of the phenotyping deficit and approaches that may be considered to bridge the gap, creating shared taxonomies between human diseases and relevant models, using cardiovascular examples.
精准医学的核心概念是对每种疾病及其对治疗的反应有足够的机制理解,从而能够指导特定的干预措施。要实现这一愿景,需要将定义不明确的疾病综合征分解为离散的机制亚组,并开发干预措施来精确解决这些具有不同病因的实体。这将需要对传统的范式进行重大调整,这些范式往往将高度不同的病因的表型聚合在一起。在当前的环境中,诊断不是基于机制的,药物开发变得如此昂贵,以至于现在想象为许多常见的慢性疾病创造新的干预措施是不切实际的。精准医学的愿景还主张更紧密地将研究与开发与临床护理相结合,在这种情况下,共享分类法将使每一次临床互动都能为我们对疾病机制和药物反应的集体理解提供信息。理想情况下,这将以推动实时和真实世界的发现、创新、转化和实施的方式执行。只有在肿瘤学中,至少部分生物学可以通过切除患病组织或液体活检来获得,“共临床”建模才被证明是可行的。在大多数常见的种系疾病中,虽然遗传学通常揭示了致病突变,但仍然存在许多有效的疾病建模障碍。将类似的疾病聚集在单一的诊断标签下,直接减少了随后任何研究的分辨率,从而直接导致病因和机制理解的缺乏。现有的临床表型通常是解剖学、生理学或组织学的,并且在人类或动物“模型”中的表型与基因组中的变异之间存在大量信息内容不匹配。疾病和动物模型之间的离散机制之间缺乏一对一的映射导致翻译失败,这是一种“表型差距”。在这篇综述中,我们将重点讨论表型缺陷的起源以及可能用于弥合差距的方法,使用心血管疾病的例子来创建人类疾病和相关模型之间的共享分类法。