HCLSIG/PharmaOntology/Meetings/2010-04-22 Conference Call

Conference Details

* Date of Call: Thursday April 22 2010 
* Time of Call: 12:00pm - 1:00pm ET 
* Dial-In #: +1.617.761.6200 (Cambridge, MA) 
* Dial-In #: +33.4.89.06.34.99 (Nice, France) 
* Dial-In #: +44.117.370.6152 (Bristol, UK) 
* Participant Access Code: 42572 ("HCLS2") 
* IRC Channel: irc.w3.org port 6665 channel #HCLS2 (see W3C IRC page for details, or see Web IRC) 
* Mibbit quick start: Click on mibbit for instant IRC access
* Duration: 1h 
* Convener: Susie

Agenda

• TMO Ontology - Elgar, Michel, Trish
• Demo Data - Michel
• IO Informatics Data - Elgar
• Interface/eMerge - Bosse, Chris
• Inclusion/Exclusion Criterion - Michel, Bosse
• TMO Next Steps - Susie
• Drug Ontology Update - Susie
• Outreach (IHI, Bio-IT World Europe, UPenn Translational Medicine) - Michel, Colin, Chris
• Upcoming Gathering - Susie
• AOB

Minutes

Attendees: Janos, Chris, Jim, Conor, Elgar, Trish, Scott, Joanne, Bosse, Susie

* Elgar: Michel has restructured the ontology, defined major groups and classes. Everyone should take a look
* Trish:  The TMO has been uploaded to NCBO (bioportal.bioontology.org) with project metadata. r 14 has been uploaded, need to touch base with Michel and get latest version uploaded
* Elgar:  Should be r 18 or 19.  Where is the most current version going to be?  Do we want two copies?
* Trish:  Agree we need an upload process to ensure consistency, but also need to maintain good code control.
* Elgar:  Scott requested an update from IO Informatics about getting access to clinical data.
* Scott:  They seemed enthusiastic  at CSHALS, but have backed off.
* Elgar: Partners may be interested in sharing data but encounter legal or other issues.
* Bosse: No news on Inclusion/Exclusion criteria
* Susie:  Next Steps with TMO.  Paper has been submitted. IHI Conference may be a good venue for presenting future work.  Michel had thoughts for next steps, need more input from him.
* Chris:  Can we get into other Clinical realms without getting too deep into the data?  Can we increase the complexity of the patient data with, i.e. images?  Perhaps get real patient data?
* Conor:  The paper is impressive, need to provide a way to visualize data inter-relationships.
* Susie:  Paper includes link to web site with paper’s questions, SPARQL and results.  Allows for  creation of queries.
* Elgar: Site has English version of the questions.
* Susie:  May need a friendlier interface.  Perhaps that’s too much to accomplish before next paper is due to be submitted.
* Susie:  Should other terminologies be incorporated (ie.e VA terms)?  Ontologies are available for other life science terms.
* Conor:  Looked at BRIDG, it seems parallel to other efforts like LOINC or SNOMED, but focused on terminologies which may not have been built/deployed yet such as SDTM or HL7v3.  May be too much an academic exercise.  TMO uses existing data sources.
* Scott:  Impression of BRIDG is the same as Conor’s.  They’re taking a top-down approach, Susie, Eric and I tried to interest them in RDF/OWL but without success.  Lots of talk about concepts without data.
* Trish:  CaBIG/NCI talking of rebuilding infrastructure Should determine their technology/terminology needs.
* Scott: Interested in that discussion.
* Susie: Ivan Herman and David Ibberson-Hurst will be at meeting in Stockholm in May, they may have opportunity to discuss semantic web.  Dave is the chief architect for CaBIG.
* Susie:  Drug Ontology update.  End of May is self-imposed deadline for key terms to include in ontology.
* Susie:  Opportunity to present TMO  at Bio-IT World Europe meeting in Hannover.  Elgar gave presentation at Bio-IT Boston this week.  There was lots of good feedback.
* In other news:  Microsoft is spinning off BioIT Alliance http://www.bio-itworld.com/news/04/21/10/Microsoft-spins-off-bioit-alliance.html.  Is it possible they’d be interested in collaboration?