Search PubMedSearch

Biomedical subjects

Lucila Ohno-Machado

Publications and source records attributed to Lucila Ohno-Machado.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Privacy-Enhancing Sequential Learning under Heterogeneous Selection Bias in Multi-Site EHR Data.

OBJECTIVE: To develop privacy-enhancing statistical methods for estimation of binary disease risk model association parameters across multiple electronic health record (EHR) sites with heterogeneous selection mechanisms, without sharing raw individual-level data. We illustrate their utility through a cross-biobank analysis of smoking and 97 cancer subtypes using data from the NIH All of Us (AOU) and the Michigan Genomics Initiative (MGI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Large-scale biobanks often follow heterogeneous recruitment strategies and store data in separate cloud-based platforms, making centralized algorithms infeasible. To address this, we propose two decentralized sequential estimators namely, Sequential Pseudo-likelihood (SPL) and Sequential Augmented Inverse Probability Weighting (SAIPW) that leverage external population-level information to adjust for selection bias, with valid variance estimation. SAIPW additionally protects against misspecification of the selection model using flexible machine learning based auxiliary outcome models. We compare SPL and SAIPW with the existing Sequential Unweighted (SUW) estimator and with centralized and meta learning extensions of IPW and AIPW in simulations under both correctly specified and misspecified selection mechanisms. We apply the methods to harmonized data from MGI ( n = 50,935) and AOU ( n = 241,563) to estimate smoking-cancer associations. RESULTS: In simulations, SUW exhibited substantial bias and poor coverage. SPL and SAIPW yielded unbiased estimates with valid coverage probabilities under correct model specification, with SAIPW remaining robust under selection model misspecification. Both approaches showed no notable efficiency loss relative to centralized methods. Meta-learning methods were efficient for large sites but failed in settings with small cohort sizes and rare outcome prevalence. In real-data analysis, strong associations were consistently identified between smoking and cancers of the lung, bladder, and larynx, aligning with established epidemiological evidence. CONCLUSION: Our framework enables valid, privacy-enhancing inference across EHR cohorts with heterogeneous selection, supporting scalable, decentralized research using real-world data.

Journal Article

Concordance of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Results during a Period of Low Prevalence.

Accurate, highly specific immunoassays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are needed to evaluate seroprevalence. This study investigated the concordance of results across four immunoassays targeting different antigens for sera collected at the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the United States. Specimens from All of Us participants contributed between January and March 2020 were tested using the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG (immunoglobulin G) assay (Abbott) and the EuroImmun SARS-CoV-2 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (EI). Participants with discordant results, participants with concordant positive results, and a subset of concordant negative results by Abbott and EI were also tested using the Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 (IgG) test (Roche) and the Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics Vitros anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG test (Ortho). The agreement and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for paired assay combinations. SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations were quantified for specimens with at least two positive results across four immunoassays. Among the 24,079 participants, the percent agreement for the Abbott and EI assays was 98.8% (95% confidence interval, 98.7%, 99%). Of the 490 participants who were also tested by Ortho and Roche, the probability-weighted percentage of agreement (95% confidence interval) between Ortho and Roche was 98.4% (97.9%, 98.9%), that between EI and Ortho was 98.5% (92.9%, 99.9%), that between Abbott and Roche was 98.9% (90.3%, 100.0%), that between EI and Roche was 98.9% (98.6%, 100.0%), and that between Abbott and Ortho was 98.4% (91.2%, 100.0%). Among the 32 participants who were positive by at least 2 immunoassays, 21 had quantifiable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations by research assays. The results across immunoassays revealed concordance during a period of low prevalence. However, the frequency of false positivity during a period of low prevalence supports the use of two sequentially performed tests for unvaccinated individuals who are seropositive by the first test. IMPORTANCE What is the agreement of commercial SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) assays during a time of low coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevalence and no vaccine availability? Serological tests produced concordant results in a time of low SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and no vaccine availability, driven largely by the proportion of samples that were negative by two immunoassays. The CDC recommends two sequential tests for positivity for future pandemic preparedness. In a subset analysis, quantified antinucleocapsid and antispike SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies do not suggest the need to specify the antigen targets of the sequential assays in the CDC's recommendation because false positivity varied as much between assays targeting the same antigen as it did between assays targeting different antigens.

Humans