Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Biolink preferred prefix #304

Open
karafecho opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Add Biolink preferred prefix #304

karafecho opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@karafecho
Copy link

The Biolink folks recently added MPATH (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ols4/ontologies/mpath) as a preferred prefix for the class biolink:PathologicalProcess, per request of folks at NIEHS. This issue is to request that we add MPATH to Node Normalizer. Thanks!

@gaurav
Copy link
Contributor

gaurav commented Dec 10, 2024

Hi Kara! Do you need all 838 pathological entities in MPATH?

To incorporate these into NodeNorm, it'd be great to get them combined with the existing concept we have -- for example, MPATH:234 "basal cell carcinoma" looks like it should be combined with MONDO:0020804 "basal cell carcinoma" -- unless we want to be really careful about keeping human and non-human concepts separate (thoughts, @cbizon?).

I don't see any mappings in the mpath.obo file, but the MPATH paper claims that they have mappings from a bunch of sources:

From the point of view of application, the most important mappings for MPATH are to the Human Phenotype Ontology (125), the Mammalian Phenotype ontology (111), the Disease Ontology (231), SNOMED-CT (867) and the NCIt (566), reflecting the emphasis on the domain of anatomic pathology rather than disease.)

I'll look through the paper in more detail to see if I can figure out where those mappings are, and if I can't find them I'll contact the authors.

@karafecho
Copy link
Author

Hi Guarav - The entities that NIEHS folks are mapping are pathological findings in rodents, so not disease per se, although they do map to MONDO when an entity does not map to MPATH. I agree with the authors of the MPATH paper, that any mappings should reflect an emphasis on the domain anatomic pathology rather than disease. Here are a few examples:

Morphology and Incidence | Morphology Ontology Link (or ID) | Morphology Ontology | Morphology (Original Term)

hepatocellular adenoma (0/50, 1/49, 0/50, 3/50, 8/49); hepatocellular carcinoma (1/50, 0/49, 0/50, 0/50, 3/49); hepatocellular adenoma or carcinoma (combined) (1/50, 1/49, 0/50, 3/50, 11/49) | http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MPATH_353 | Hepatocellular adenoma | Hepatocellular adenoma

hepatocellular adenoma (0/50, 1/49, 0/50, 3/50, 8/49); hepatocellular carcinoma (1/50, 0/49, 0/50, 0/50, 3/49); hepatocellular adenoma or carcinoma (combined) (1/50, 1/49, 0/50, 3/50, 11/49) | http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MPATH_357 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | hepatocellular carcinoma

acinar adenoma (10/50, 7/49, 8/50, 36/50, 22/49); acinar carcinoma (0/50, 0/49, 0/50, 3/50, 1/49); acinar adenoma or carcinoma (combined) (10/50, 7/49, 8/50, 38/50, 22/49) | http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MPATH_270 | Adenoma | acinar adenoma

Happy to chat, if that would be helpful.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants