SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO EVALUATE DRUG-INDUCED GASTROINTESTINAL DYSRHYTHMIA

Information

  • Patent Application
  • 20230352136
  • Publication Number
    20230352136
  • Date Filed
    March 07, 2023
    2 years ago
  • Date Published
    November 02, 2023
    2 years ago
Abstract
The subject invention pertains to the application of GI slow-wave network analysis to profile GI side effects for applications including high-throughput drug screening on a microelectrode array (MEA) platform. Slow-wave data can be obtained, evaluated, interpreted, and used to build a comprehensive database based on the effects of specified drugs on GI pacemaker activity for predictive and classification purposes. In one example, pacemaker potentials were recorded extracellularly on a 60-channel MEA system using full-thickness GI segments isolated from Suncus murinus. Basic slow-wave parameters, including frequency, amplitude, slope, period, and power partitions, were derived. Signal regularity was also evaluated using detrended fluctuation analysis and sample entropy analysis. Signal propagation, velocity, and activation time patterns were also constructed and compared before and after treatment with dopamine (0.1-100 μM).
Description
REFERENCE TO SEQUENCE LISTING

The Sequence Listing for this application is labeled “CUHK.174XC1.xml” which was created on Feb. 8, 2023 and is 12,043 bytes. The entire content of the sequence listing is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Medicines often unexpectedly disturb gastrointestinal (GI) functions. The process of drug approval by the US Food and Drug Administration do not have requirements regarding the drug potential adverse effects at its non-target sites, such as the GI. Drug discovery and development phase focus only on the drug efficacy to treat a target disease and very often test only using cell-based models or rodents, without evaluating the side effects on GI function. Drug adverse effects, such as vomiting, nausea, diarrhea, and constipation, etc. can remain until entering clinical trials, which wastes a large amount of money and time. Conventional approaches to drug discovery often fail to identify emetic liability and GI complications until reaching clinical trials. Unfortunately, the late identification of GI adverse effects can result in unnecessary experimentation, the termination of clinical investigations, and the loss of projected revenue. Conventional approaches to investigating drugs affecting the GI tract are useful, but they do not usually capture effects on ‘slow waves’, which are known to be disturbed during nausea and emesis. Dopamine is a well-known neurotransmitter and a precursor of noradrenaline and adrenaline biosynthesis. Dopamine receptor agonists are used to treat cardiovascular disorders and Parkinson's disease, but they have adverse side effect profiles that include nausea, vomiting, and constipation.


BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Embodiments of the subject invention can provide an index and guidelines on the potential effects of drugs to induce GI dysfunction using a standardized and efficient method for prediction using a learning model based on a novel database built using a standardized methodology.


Embodiments can advantageously employ dopamine as an exemplar drug to introduce the application of GI slow-wave network analysis to profile GI side effects for high-throughput drug screening on a microelectrode array (MEA) platform. In certain embodiments, slow-wave data can be obtained, evaluated, interpreted, and used to build a comprehensive database based on the effects of drugs on GI pacemaker activity for predictive and classification purposes.


Embodiments can provide a technique to record GI pacemaker activity, also named slow waves, in GI tissues isolated from small animals using the microelectrode array (MEA) platform. Embodiments have demonstrated >75% success rate in recording high quality pacemaker signals. Embodiments can provide analytical programs (e.g., automatic programs using MATLAB, The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA) for efficient and blind data analysis for slow wave feature extractions.


Embodiments can provide a standardized protocol to evaluate acute drug effects on GI pacemaker activity. Data can be collected and stored in a drug database. In one embodiment, a drug database contains more than 100 exemplar drugs and continues to grow. In this embodiment, the database value is advantageously enhanced since the data was compiled using standardized methodology enabling highly reliable drug-to-drug comparisons. The application of the database includes, but is not limited to, drug research and development, food safety test, research on traditional remedies, and development of personalized drug therapy.


Embodiments can provide drug testing services using a standardized methodology and automatic data analytical pipeline to generate standardized drug testing reports. Such reports can include slow wave features extracted to be compared with the existing database to add value, advance development, or generate revenues. In certain embodiments, machine learning models are provided to beneficially refine features for different purposes, such as to predict nausea potential, or to classify drugs. Such refined features can be referred to as Gastrointestinal Dysrhythmia Indexes. These indexes can provide important insights on the potentials of drugs to cause (or treat) GI dysrhythmia. Embodiments can provide information generated by business models (e.g., drug testing services) that will be useful in decision making in drug discovery and development, and medical prescription.


Embodiments can provide an efficient and standardized method for testing the effects of one or more specified substances on pacemaker activity of gastrointestinal tissues. Certain embodiments can provide test results to clients; advantageously apply a standardized method to build databases relevant to the effects of substances on pacemaker activity of gastrointestinal tissues; and generate machine learning models based on the databases to provide consistent, reliable and reproducible results with minimized bias and minimized errors to clients (e.g., to determine the risk of side effects of a drug; or to determine the agonist or antagonist actions of a drug.)


Embodiments can provide a standardized methodology to record electrical pacemaker signals from the surface of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissues from a living organism. Embodiments can further provide a set of instructions written in a machine-readable format to allow automatic, efficient, consistent, and non-biased extraction of features from recorded pacemaker signals. Embodiments can further provide a database built using a standardized method to allow generation of machine learning models, with or without the integration of other sources of databases for generating results of classifications, comparisons and predictions related to the tested substances.


Embodiments can provide a novel business model that is unique in its method to generate revenue, optionally attached to the MEA technology, and the provided automatic analytical pipelines, and a provided novel and private database produced under highly standardized protocols.


Embodiments of a business model is accordance with the subject invention can provide advantages including, but not limited to the following. Efficiency, wherein an experiment can be done, for example, within 24 hours tested on 4 segments of the GI at 3 different doses on 6 animal replicates within the limitation of an existing MEA platform. Efficiency and Accuracy, wherein data analysis can be performed using developed automatic and blinded software programs to reduce time spent, bias, and human errors. Consistency and reliability, wherein data can be generated using a standardized method allowing reliable data comparison to additional data stored in a database. Comprehensive results, wherein the method can apply the use of MEA technology over conventional methods such as single microelectrodes, patch clamping, and calcium imaging for recording pacemaker activity. The MEA technology can be advantageously employed to capture pacemaker signals over a larger area including information on propagating and networking behavior, together with a developed program for comprehensive feature extractions to generate comprehensive information on drug effects on GI motility in terms of pacemaker activity. Blinded study, wherein the data collection and data analysis process can be made more effectively blinded, thus avoiding bias. The unique predictive power, wherein there are no known standardized database for evaluating drug effects on pacemaker activity at the GI. The current drug databases generated based on a standardized protocol in accordance with embodiments of the subject invention provides a unique and novel predictive power for evaluating the potential of a candidate cause (or to treat) GI dysrhythmia.


Embodiments can advantageously employ the use of related art elements, including but not limited to existing developed MEA platforms including the machines (Multichannel Systems, Germany) and devices such as the MEA chips (Ayanda Biosystems or Multichannel Systems, Germany); the application of the MEA to record GI pacemaker activity in small animals; the application of the MEA to evaluate drug effects; the application of the data analysis using known formulas and algorithms to extract slow wave features, including continuous wavelet transform, Hilbert transform, detrended fluctuation analysis, sample entropy, and machine learning.


GI motility is highly coordinated by rhythmic electrical signals, called pacemaking activity or slow-waves, controlled by network of interstitial cells of Cajal (ICC). These propagating electrical signals can be recorded using a microelectrode array (MEA) platform, and drug-induced effects on GI pacemaking activity can be tested using a standardized methodology as disclosed herein. It is proposed that these electrical signals are the languages representing healthy bowel movement and reflecting non-conscious health and disease conditions of our body.


Electrical data is a category of big-data which is currently highly-underutilized in biology and medicine. To decode the language of rhythmic GI pacemaking signals, embodiments of the subject invention take in the signals during drug treatment as the signals work to activate various receptors, ion channels, enzymes, and the like. The final pacemaking signals can integrate signals directly coming from ICC, indirect interactions with enteric neurons and smooth muscles, and signals coming beyond the GI. Embodiments of the subject invention decode and translate these signals with the help of artificial intelligence (AI) technology, to identify correlations between GI pacemaker activity and health and disease. The inventors have collected and integrated a large amount of drug testing data on GI pacemaker activity in previously published and unpublished studies, where in certain embodiments a standardized and robust MEA methodology is provided to test different drugs at different effective doses in different GI segments including, stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon [1-6]. Embodiments provide a new type of electrophysiological drug database based on changes in 24 signal features extracted from recorded GI pacemaker activity before and after acute drug treatment. These extracted signal features are referred to as electrical features (EF). This drug database is referred to as the Gastro-Intestinal Pacemaker Activity Drug Database (GIPADD). While the GIPADD is intended to undergo continued growth and future expansion, certain embodiments reported herein were created using a cut-off database with 89 drugs and 4,867 datasets. Embodiments provide application of this novel EF drug database, GIPADD, to predict drug adverse effects (AEs).


In the emerging field of AI drug discovery, AI had been applied in designing drug molecules and predicting drug targets, responses and AEs. Current methodologies mainly used drugs' physical and chemical properties, AI-predicted or known drug-protein-receptor binding interactions, and genetic or gene expression profiles [7,8]. Embodiments of the subject invention introduce EF drug profile into this research field. Related art drug AEs prediction AI models have significant limitation in data quality, including bias, non-standardized, and non-validated data collection methodologies. Data used in related art systems and methods mainly came from publications which often present data that supports a hypothesis, instead of a pure factual data presentation, where negative data can be unreported. Prediction algorithms based on these data suffered significant biased towards what is discovered or hypothesized by investigators, limiting the ability to discover novel pathways or correlations. Embodiments of the subject invention provide systems and methods for creating and maintaining physiological drug databases produced by standardized and validated methodology, providing numerous advantageous improvements in AI drug discovery. In certain embodiments GIPADD is produced by a highly-standardized methodology, i.e., drug profiles of each categorized drug stored in GIPADD are highly consistent, and therefore, can act as positive and negative controls for each other depending on the testing hypothesis. Additionally, GIPADD stores unique EFs, which potentially integrate further with other drug databases storing physical, chemical, genetic data, and the like. Certain embodiments integrate GIPADD with side-effect resource (SIDER) to test the hypothesis to use drug-induced GI pacemaker EFs to predict drug AEs. Moreover, GI function goes far beyond digestion for absorbing life-supporting nutrients, but also contributes to at least 70 percent of our immunity and 95 percent of serotonin release controlling our emotions [45]. It expresses almost all known receptors or proteins found in the brain, liver, reproductive organs, etc. Without being bound by theory, the inventors hypothesize that AEs prediction using GI pacemaker activity can go beyond predicting only GI-related AEs, to include AEs in immunology, cardiovascular, psychology, and other areas of interest.


In certain embodiments GIPADD provides novel EF big-data resources for training AI models in drug discovery to correlate drug EF profiles for the prediction of drug adverse effects or drug targets. GIPADD is a small but growing database. Problems like lack of datasets and imbalanced datasets for certain AEs can be improved by adding more drug profiles into the database through standardized drug testing methodology. GIPADD is a novel drug database storing EFs providing a novel and advantageous source of big-data learning materials for the emerging field of artificial intelligence drug discovery, as well as a novel and uniquely advantageous solution to challenges of working with biased learning materials.


Certain embodiments provide specified novel and innovative solutions. In data analysis, embodiments provide a novel methodology to combine the use of the extracted slow wave features by known algorithms to evaluate GI dysrhythmia based on comparative change of these features as standards to evaluate potentials of drugs to cause (or to treat) GI dysrhythmia. In data analysis, embodiments can provide a novel fully automatic methodology to apply phase-based spatial analysis to evaluate percentage change of dominant propagation patterns as a major feature for drug functional tests in GI dysrhythmia, the features extracted can also be stored into the database. Embodiments can provide a stated standardized drug testing protocol (including the stated experiment methodology and the specialized data analytical pipeline) to provide drug testing services to generate revenue. Embodiments can provide a private, proprietary, or novel database built using a stated standardized protocol for useful, consistent, and reliable data comparison to generate revenue.


Embodiments can provide a standardized methodology to allow an easy, reliable, and consistent comparison between test agents and compounds in the proprietary database. One existing problem in studying drug effects in physiology is that data are scattered in separate literatures and were conducted in separate laboratories using different experimental protocols. This makes data comparison very difficult, especially if a large-scale data comparison is aimed for building predictive or classification learning models. Additionally, physiology experiments for drug testing are often tedious and require high-level training to maintain consistency, a high success rate, and unbiased analysis of results.


Embodiments can include the use of a MEA platform for high-throughput drug screening and testing using a highly efficient and standardized methodology and analytical pipelines for building a database. The database can systematically store information on drug effects on GI pacemaker activity. Using the database, reliable and systematic drug-to-drug comparison, grouping and application to machine learning for building classification and predictive model can be made more feasible, efficient, and reliable. For example, the classification of drug actions on a specific receptor, or the refined features for predicting the potential of a drug to induce nausea. Certain embodiments can provide the construction of Gastrointestinal Dysrhythmia Indexes for guiding drug discovery processes in terms of the potentials of drugs to induce GI adverse effects such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, and the like. The same or similar model and database in accordance with the subject invention can be used to identify drugs to potentially treat GI dysrhythmia. This information can be useful in applications including but not limited to drug discovery and development, food safety policies, and development of personalized drug therapy.


Embodiments can provide a highly standardized database, wherein standardized methodology can attract clients who would like to test their drugs and compare their drug profile with existing data in the database, or estimate the potential effects of novel drugs based on the predictive power of the database. Embodiments can provide a business model that includes providing drug testing services to help clients to test their drugs using a standardized methodology and automatic analytical pipelines and drug comparison services to compare their drugs with one or more selected private databases to generate revenue.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.



FIGS. 1A-1O show certain effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention. Slow-wave features including the (FIG. 1A) dominant frequency (DF), (FIG. 1B) average frequency (AF), and (FIG. 1C) dominant power (DP); (FIG. 1D) the average amplitude, (FIG. 1E) slope, and (FIG. 1F) period of the waveforms; (FIG. 1G) propagation velocity; (FIG. 1H) detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) fluctuation function at smaller window scale (3-25) and (FIG. 1I) at larger window scale (26-46); and (FIG. 1J) sample entropy (SampEn) at smaller window scale (1-5) and (FIG. 1K) at larger window scale (6-50) are indicated as the percentage change after dopamine (0.1-100 μM) treatment, compared with baseline recordings. (FIGS. 1L-M) The effects of dopamine (100 μM) on pacemaker potentials determined by DFA in isolated Suncus murinus ilea, (FIG. 1L) DFA fluctuation functions of all 60 electrodes, where the scale is the same as the enlarged graph in (FIG. 1M), showing only channel 37. (FIGS. 1N-O) The effects of dopamine (100 μM) on pacemaker potentials determined by SampEn in isolated Suncus murinus ilea, (FIG. 1N) The SampEn of all 60 electrodes, where the scale is the same as the enlarged graph in (FIG. 1O), showing only channel 37.



FIGS. 2A-2E show certain effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials determined by the frequency shifting behavior of the power spectrum according to an embodiment of the subject invention. Power spectra were generated using 5 min baseline data obtained from the (FIG. 2A) stomach and (FIG. 2B) colon using fast Fourier transform analysis with a bin size of 2048 and a Hanning window. (FIG. 2C) Stacked histograms showing the effects of dopamine (0.1-100 μM) on frequency partitioning along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus. (FIGS. 2D-E) Representative spectrograms showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on the (FIG. 2D, left panel) stomach, and the effects of 10 μM dopamine on the (FIG. 2D, right panel) duodenum, (FIG. 2E, left panel) ileum, and (FIG. 2E, right panel) colon of Suncus murinus.



FIGS. 3A-3G show certain effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials determined by the activation time pattern distribution according to an embodiment of the subject invention. (FIGS. 3A-C) Representative figures showing the three most dominant activation time patterns within the (FIG. 3A) baseline recordings and the (FIG. 3B) post-treatment recordings. (FIG. 3C) The counts of the appearance of each grouped activation time pattern determined at 20 s intervals. The pattern distribution of the dominant activation time patterns based on the (FIG. 3D) baseline and (FIG. 3E) post-treatment recordings. (FIG. 3F) The number of grouped activation time patterns within the baseline and post-treatment recordings. (FIG. 3G) The total percentage change of all activation time patterns induced by dopamine treatment is indicated as ActP.



FIG. 4 shows a radar diagram showing the profile of dopamine effects on pacemaker potentials along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention. All data show the mean percentage change in slow-wave features, including the dominant frequency (DF); average frequency (AF); percentage of brady-rhythm, normal rhythm, and tachy-rhythm; dominant power (DP); average amplitude, slope, and period of the waveform; average propagation velocity; detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) fluctuation function with small window scale 3-25 and large window scale 26-46; sample entropy (SampEn) with small window scale 1-5 and large window scale 6-50; and the total change in activation time pattern (ActP). The radar diagram provides an immediate indication of how dopamine affects GI pacemaker activity across selected parameters in one graph.



FIGS. 5A-5D. show an example application of a drug database according to an embodiment of the subject invention. A clustergram showing the 24 slow-wave features extracted from the duodenal data for a list of drugs (FIG. 5A) with known nausea-inducing or non-nausea-inducing properties and (FIG. 5B) known to be agonists or antagonists of the dopamine receptor. Features extracted with significant differences between (FIG. 5C) the nausea-inducing and non-nausea-inducing drugs and (FIG. 5D) the dopamine agonists and antagonists.



FIG. 6 shows the mRNA expression of dopamine receptors in Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIGS. 7A-7I show representative spatio-temporal maps showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on the stomach, and the effects of 10 μM dopamine on the duodenum, ileum, and colon of Suncus murinus compared to baseline according to an embodiment of the subject invention. (FIG. 7A) comparison matrix showing baseline and treatment for each of stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon, and (FIGS. 7B-I) detailed views of: (FIG. 7B) stomach baseline; (FIG. 7C) stomach 100 μM dopamine; (FIG. 7D) duodenum baseline; (FIG. 7E) duodenum 10 μM dopamine; (FIG. 7F) ileum baseline; (FIG. 7G) ileum 10 μM dopamine; (FIG. 7H) colon baseline; (FIG. 7I) colon 10 μM dopamine.



FIG. 8 shows representative raw traces showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on the stomach, and the effects of 10 μM dopamine on the duodenum, ileum, and colon of Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIGS. 9A-9F illustrates representative data collected on ferrets according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIG. 10 illustrates representative raw data collected on rats according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIGS. 11A-11B illustrate representative progression of screen shots from a video clip showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on wave propagation in the stomach over approximately two cycles according to an embodiment of the subject invention at (FIG. 11A) baseline and (FIG. 11B) after drug treatment. For each frame of FIG. 11A and FIG. 11B, respectively, the Distance in mm is shown from (0,0) in the top left corner to (1.4, 1.4) in the bottom right corner, and the Normalized Amplitude (%) color scale ranges from blue (−200) to green (0) to red (+200); as shown in FIG. 11A.



FIGS. 12A-12B illustrate representative progression of screen shots from a video clip showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on wave propagation in the colon according to an embodiment of the subject invention at (FIG. 12A) baseline and (FIG. 12B) after drug treatment. For each frame of FIG. 12A and FIG. 12B, respectively, the Distance in mm is shown from (0,0) in the top left corner to (1.4, 1.4) in the bottom right corner, and the Normalized Amplitude (%) color scale ranges from blue (−200) to green (0) to red (+200); as shown in FIG. 11A.



FIGS. 13A-13B illustrate a flow chart showing the process from dataset preparation, to machine learning (ML) model training, to prediction result refinement for generating different types of ML models according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIGS. 14A-14C illustrate model comparisons according to an embodiment of the subject invention. (FIG. 14A) The prediction accuracy of models built using different dataset preparations for refined selected-AEs (n=10-13); (FIG. 14B) The prediction accuracy of different tissue models. ‘All’ column indicates average of all 4-tissue-type (n=2,016) and ‘Intestine’ column indicates average of 3 intestinal segments except stomach (n=1,554), stomach and ileum (n=462), duodenum and colon (n=546); (FIG. 14C) The prediction accuracy of model trained using different classification algorithms (n=336). Data represents the mean±S.D. Significant differences are indicated as * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 using paired t-tests.



FIGS. 15A-15L illustrate excitatory and inhibitory correlations to GI pacemaker activity in selected-AEs according to an embodiment of the subject invention. The percentage change of selected features in various AE-inducing drugs and non-AE-inducing drugs. Data represents the mean±S.D. Significant differences are indicated as * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 using unpaired t-tests (n=46-1,326).



FIGS. 16A-16D illustrate selected GI pacemaker features correlated with AEs according to an embodiment of the subject invention. (FIG. 16A) Network graph clustering selected drugs by refined EFs to an example AE: constipation. The length of black arrow represents the level that the model can distinguish between positive-correlated features and negative-correlated features in constipation (shaded in yellow). Blue arrow and Red arrow has a short distance to positive-correlated features of constipation, where these two drugs ondansetron (“ond”) and morphine (“mor”) are known in market to induce constipation. Drugs acting on similar receptors, such as prostaglandin E1 (“pge1”) and prostaglandin E2 (“pge2”) or substance P (“sp”) and neurokinin A (“nka”) are clustered close to each other based on EF drug profile (shaded in yellow). The color of the bubbles represents the clustered groups of drugs, which show the successful clustering on top of spatial information provided by the bubbles. (FIGS. 16B-D) The percentage change of selected features compared between AE-inducing drugs and non-AE-inducing drugs in (FIG. 16B) GI-related AEs including abdominal distension, upset stomach, and abdominal cramps, (FIG. 16C) psychology-related AEs including anxiety and depression, and (FIG. 16D) and Cardiovascular-related AEs including hypotension, hypertension. Data represents the mean±S.D. Significant differences are indicated as * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 using unpaired t-tests (n=228-1,300). NKA: neurokinin A; LPS: lipopolysaccharides.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEQUENCES





    • SEQ ID NO: 1 Forward primer D1 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 2 Reverse primer D1 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 3 Amplified D1 Dopamine receptor DNA segment (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 4 Forward primer D2 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 5 Reverse primer D2 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 6 Amplified D2 Dopamine receptor DNA segment (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 7 Forward primer D3 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 8 Reverse primer D3 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 9 Amplified D3 Dopamine receptor DNA segment (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 10 Forward primer D4 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 11 Reverse primer D4 Dopamine receptor (Suncus murinus)

    • SEQ ID NO: 12 Amplified D4 Dopamine receptor DNA segment (Suncus murinus)





DETAILED DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION

The invention may be better understood by reference to certain non-limiting embodiments, including but not limited to the following.


Embodiment 1 can provide a method of testing effects of one or more substances on pacemaker activity on gastrointestinal tissues using a recording platform to determine whether the substances belong to one or more classes, the method comprising:

    • applying one or more substances for testing on at least one sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue from a living organism;
    • maintaining the freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue in oxygenated medium to maintain the viability of tissues;
    • recording electrical signals from a surface of the tissue using the recording platform to store a recorded digital signal;
    • storing the recorded digital signal in a data storage device;
    • analyzing the recorded digital signal using a set of machine-readable instructions that allow a computer to extract at least one feature from the recorded digital signal; generating a report of test results;
    • reporting the test results to a client;
    • storing the test results into one or more databases;
    • training one or more machine learning models based on the test results stored in the one or more databases, to create one or more trained models;
    • applying at least one of the one or more trained models for classifying, predicting, or comparing the one or more substances;
    • reporting a result of the classifying, predicting, or comparing results to a client.


Embodiment 2. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the one or more substances comprise one or more of drugs, pharmacological agents, chemical compounds, synthesized substances, food, remedies, herbs, extracts, and combinations of the above.


Embodiment 3. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the recording platform comprises a signal receiver, an amplifier, an internal filter, a grounding electrode and a microelectrode array chip; the microelectrode array chip comprising a multiplicity of microelectrodes embedded on a rigid substrate.


Embodiment 4. The method according to Embodiment 1, comprising predicting and classifying between agonist and antagonist actions of the one or more substances, or predicting and classifying between high-risk and low-risk in a set of selected side effects of the one or more substances.


Embodiment 5. The method according to Embodiment 4, the set of selected side effects comprising one or more of vomiting, emesis, nausea, diarrhea, constipation, abdominal discomfort, and dysrhythmia.


Embodiment 6. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue comprises tissue from one or more of an esophagus, stomach, duodenum, jejunum, ileum, rectum, caecum, or colon.


Embodiment 7. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the living organism is an organism having functional gastrointestinal organs.


Embodiment 8. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the living organism is human, mammalian, reptilian, or aquatic.


Embodiment 9. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the living organism is healthy; or diagnosed with a disease, genetic condition, or alteration; or pre-treated with at least one of the one or more substances prior to the applying one or more substances for testing.


Embodiment 10. The method according to embodiment 1, further comprising the step of removing contents from within the gastrointestinal tissue.


Embodiment 11. The method according to Embodiment 1, further comprising maintaining the temperature of the freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue within a range of twenty to forty degrees Celsius.


Embodiment 12. The method according to Embodiment 1, further comprising recording a baseline signal for at least five minutes prior to the applying one or more substances for testing.


Embodiment 13. The method according to Embodiment 1, further comprising delivering one or more substances onto the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue.


Embodiment 14. The method according to Embodiment 13, wherein the delivering comprises either direct delivery using a handheld pipette or machine-controlled delivery using a machine-controlled perfusion system.


Embodiment 15. The method according to Embodiment 13, wherein the recording electrical signals occurs after the step of delivering one or more substances onto the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue.


Embodiment 16. The method according to Embodiment 12, further comprising comparing the baseline signals to the signals recorded after the step of delivering one or more substances.


Embodiment 17. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the recorded digital signal is created within less than one hour after the applying one or more substances for testing.


Embodiment 18. The method according to Embodiment 1, wherein the at least one feature from the recorded digital signal comprises one or more of:

    • the determination of a number of dominant propagation patterns using a factor of activation times found at each electrode within the baseline period and post substance delivery period into time interval between ten to sixty second;
    • the percentage of the dominant propagation patterns found based on the baseline period of signals and the post-substance delivery period of signals are derived; and
    • the change in the percentage of a first, second, or third propagation pattern based on baseline period and post-substance delivery period being compared between the baseline signals and signals recorded after the step of delivering one or more substances to determine one or more effects of the one or more substances on a pacemaker propagation pattern.


Embodiment 19. The method according to Embodiment 1, further comprising constructing one or more databases to store the at least one feature from the recorded digital signals for each of the one or more substances.


Embodiment 20. The method according to Embodiment 19, comprising building a trained machine learning model based on the one or more databases, and integrating the one or more databases with at least one other database or training model.


Embodiment 21. A method of testing effects of one or more substances on pacemaker activity on gastrointestinal tissues using a recording platform to determine whether the one or more substances belong to one or more classes, the method comprising:

    • applying a substance for testing on at least one sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue from a living organism;
    • maintaining the tissue in oxygenated medium to maintain a viability of the tissue; recording electrical signals from a surface of the tissue using the recording platform to create a recorded digital signal;
    • storing the recorded digital signal in a data storage device;
    • generating a plurality of test results by analyzing the recorded digital signal using a set of machine-readable instructions that allow a computer to extract at least one feature from the recorded digital signal;
    • storing the plurality of test results into a database;
    • training one or more machine learning models based on the plurality of test results stored in the database, to create a trained model;
    • applying the trained model for classifying, predicting, or comparing the substance; reporting a result of the classifying, predicting, or comparing.


Embodiment 22. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the substance comprises one or more of drugs, pharmacological agents, chemical compounds, synthesized substances, food, remedies, herbs, extracts, and any combination thereof.


Embodiment 23. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the recording platform comprises a signal receiver, an amplifier, an internal filter, a grounding electrode and a microelectrode array chip; the microelectrode array chip comprising a multiplicity of microelectrodes embedded on a rigid substrate.


Embodiment 24. The method according to Embodiment 21, comprising predicting and classifying between agonist and antagonist actions of the one or more substances, or predicting and classifying between high-risk and low-risk in a set of selected side effects of the substance.


Embodiment 25. The method according to Embodiment 24, the set of selected side effects comprising one or more of vomiting, emesis, nausea, diarrhea, constipation, abdominal discomfort, and dysrhythmia.


Embodiment 26. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue comprises tissue from one of an esophagus, stomach, duodenum, jejunum, ileum, rectum, caecum, or colon.


Embodiment 27. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the living organism is an organism having functional gastrointestinal organs.


Embodiment 28. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the living organism is human, mammalian, reptilian, or aquatic.


Embodiment 29. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the living organism is healthy; or diagnosed with a disease, genetic condition, or alteration; or is pre-treated with the substance prior to the applying the substance for testing.


Embodiment 30. The method according to Embodiment 21, further comprising the step of removing contents from within the freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue.


Embodiment 31. The method according to Embodiment 21, further comprising maintaining the temperature of the freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue within a range of twenty to forty degrees Celsius.


Embodiment 32. The method according to Embodiment 21, further comprising recording a baseline signal for at least five minutes prior to the applying the substance for testing.


Embodiment 33. The method according to Embodiment 32, the applying the substance for testing comprising delivering a specified quantity of the substance onto the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue at a specified time after the recording of the baseline signal.


Embodiment 34. The method according to Embodiment 33, wherein the delivering comprises either direct delivery using a handheld pipette or machine-controlled delivery using a machine-controlled perfusion system.


Embodiment 35. The method according to Embodiment 33, wherein the recording electrical signals occurs after the delivering of the specified quantity of the substance onto the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue at the specified time, and wherein the recorded digital signal is a post-substance delivery signal.


Embodiment 36. The method according to Embodiment 35, further comprising comparing the baseline signal to the post-substance delivery signal.


Embodiment 37. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the recorded digital signal is created within less than one hour after the applying one or more substances for testing.


Embodiment 38. The method according to Embodiment 21, wherein the at least one feature from the recorded digital signal comprises one or more of:

    • the determination of a number of dominant propagation patterns using a factor of respective activation times found at each electrode within a baseline period and a post-substance delivery period, respectively, into a time interval between ten to sixty seconds;
    • the percentage of the dominant propagation patterns found in the baseline period and the post-substance delivery period, respectively; and
    • the change in the percentage of a first, second, or third propagation pattern based on a comparison between the baseline period and the post-substance delivery period.


Embodiment 39. The method according to Embodiment 21, the substance being a first substance and the database comprising (i) a first unique individual database section configured to store the at least one feature from the recorded digital signal for the first substance and (i) a second unique individual database section configured to store at least one feature from a recorded digital signal for a second substance.


Embodiment 40. The method according to Embodiment 39, comprising building a trained machine learning model based on the first unique individual database section and the second unique individual database section.


Embodiment 41. The method according to Embodiment 40, further comprising integrating the first unique individual database section and the second unique individual database section with at least one other database or training model.


Embodiment 42. A system for determining adverse effects (AEs) of one or more substances on a gastrointestinal (GI) tissue, the system comprising:

    • an electrical signal platform configured and adapted to create an electrical signal from the GI tissue;
    • a processor; and
    • a machine-readable medium in operable communication with the electrical signal platform and the processor and having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the processor, perform the following steps:
      • recording the electrical signal from the GI tissue to create a recorded digital signal;
      • storing the recorded digital signal in the machine-readable medium;
      • generating a plurality of test results by analyzing the recorded digital signal to extract at least one feature from the recorded digital signal;
      • storing the plurality of test results into a database;
      • training one or more machine learning models based on the plurality of test results stored in the database, to create a trained model;
      • applying the trained model to determine the AEs by classifying, predicting, or comparing the substance;
      • reporting a result of the AEs determined by classifying, predicting, or comparing the substance.


Embodiment 43. A system for determining adverse effects (AEs) or drug targets of one or more substances on a gastrointestinal (GI) tissue, the system comprising:

    • an electrical signal platform configured and adapted to create an electrical signal from the GI tissue;
    • a processor; and
    • a machine-readable medium in operable communication with the electrical signal platform and the processor and having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the processor, perform the following steps:
      • recording the electrical signal from the GI tissue to create a recorded digital signal;
      • storing the recorded digital signal in the machine-readable medium;
      • generating a plurality of test results by analyzing the recorded digital signal to extract at least one feature from the recorded digital signal;
      • storing the plurality of test results into a database;
      • training one or more machine learning models based on the plurality of test results stored in the database, to create a trained model;
      • applying the trained model to determine the AEs or drug targets by classifying, predicting, or comparing the substance;
      • reporting a result of the AEs or drug targets determined by classifying, predicting, or comparing the substance.


Embodiment 44. The method according to Embodiment 43, the instructions when executed by the processor performing the additional step of clustering two or more compounds together based on a common action to similar receptors or similar drug-induced AEs.


Embodiment 45. The method according to Embodiment 44, the step of clustering comprising application of a network graph cluster as shown in FIG. 16A.


Turning now to the figures, FIGS. 1A-1O show certain effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention. Slow-wave features including the (FIG. 1A) dominant frequency (DF), (FIG. 1B) average frequency (AF), and (FIG. 1C) dominant power (DP); the average (FIG. 1D) amplitude, (FIG. 1E) slope, and (FIG. 1F) period of the waveforms; (FIG. 1G) propagation velocity; detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) fluctuation function (FIG. 1H) at smaller window scale (3-35) and (FIG. 1I) at larger window scale (26-46); and (FIG. 1J) sample entropy (SampEn) at smaller window scale (1-5) and (FIG. 1K) at larger window scale (5-60) are indicated as the percentage change after dopamine (0.1-100 μM) treatment, compared with baseline recordings. All data and error bars represent the means and the standard deviations, respectively. Significant differences in the true means of post-treatment data, relative to baseline data, are indicated as ‘*’ for p<0.05, ‘**’ for p<0.01, and ‘***’ for p<0.001 (paired Student's t-tests). No significant differences (ns) were identified for propagation velocity. (FIGS. 1L-M) The effects of dopamine (100 μM) on pacemaker potentials determined by DFA in isolated Suncus murinus ilea. For each scale and each time segment, the fluctuation functions of the corresponding sample were calculated. (FIG. 1L) DFA fluctuation functions of all 60 electrodes, where the scale is the same as the enlarged graph in (FIG. 1M), showing only channel 37. Drug administration artefacts occurring at approximately the 5-6 min time segment were not included in the statistical analyses. (FIGS. 1N-O) The effects of dopamine (100 μM) on pacemaker potentials determined by SampEn in isolated Suncus murinus ilea. Entropy analysis consisted of a scale from 0-50. (FIG. 1N) The SampEn of all 60 electrodes, where the scale is the same as the enlarged graph in (FIG. 1O), showing only channel 37. Drug administration artefacts occurring at approximately the 5-6 min time segment were not included in the statistical analyses.



FIGS. 2A-2E show certain effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials determined by the frequency shifting behavior of the power spectrum according to an embodiment of the subject invention. Power spectra were generated using 5 min baseline data obtained from the (FIG. 2A) stomach and (FIG. 2B) colon using fast Fourier transform analysis with a bin size of 2048 and a Hanning window. The dominant frequency (DF) was defined as the frequency bin with the highest power. The percentage of normal-rhythm range was defined as the percentage of power within DF+1 frequency bins over the total power (0-50 cpm). The percentage of brady-rhythm range was defined as the percentage of power within 2-(DF−1) cpm over the total power. The percentage of tachy-rhythm range was defined as the percentage of power within (DF+1)-40 cpm over the total power. Out-of-range frequencies were defined as the percentage of power<2 cpm and >40 cpm over the total power. (FIG. 2C) Stacked histograms showing the effects of dopamine (0.1-100 μM) on frequency partitioning along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus. The dominant frequency was first defined by the baseline, and changes in the percentage of frequency ranges were compared between the recordings at baseline and after drug treatment. All data and error bars represent the means and standard deviations, respectively. Significant differences relative to the baseline are indicated as ‘1’ for p<0.05, ‘2’ for p<0.01, and ‘3’ for p<0.001 (paired Student's t-tests). (FIGS. 2D-E) Representative spectrograms showing the effects of 100 M dopamine on the stomach, and the effects of 10 μM dopamine on the duodenum, ileum, and colon of Suncus murinus. Spectrograms were generated by subdividing the total length of raw data (11 min) into 0.55 min windows and plotting them against time, with a 50% overlap. Drug administration artefacts occurring at approximately the 5 min time segment were not included in the statistical analyses.



FIGS. 3A-3G show certain effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials determined by the activation time pattern distribution according to an embodiment of the subject invention. (FIGS. 3A-C) Representative figures showing the three most dominant activation time patterns within the (FIG. 3A) baseline recordings and the (FIG. 3B) post-treatment recordings. (FIG. 3C) The counts of the appearance of each grouped activation time pattern determined at 20 s intervals. The pattern distribution of the dominant activation time patterns based on the (FIG. 3D) baseline and (FIG. 3E) post-treatment recordings. All data and error bars represent the means and standard deviations, respectively. Significant differences relative to the baseline are indicated as ‘1’ for p<0.05, ‘2’ for p<0.01, and ‘3’ for p<0.001 (paired Student's t-tests). (FIG. 3F) The number of grouped activation time patterns within the baseline and post-treatment recordings. All data and error bars represent the means and standard deviations, respectively. Significant differences relative to the baseline are indicated as ‘*’ for p<0.05, ‘**’ for p<0.01, and ‘****’ for p<0.0001 (paired Student's t-tests). (FIG. 3G) The total percentage change of all activation time patterns induced by dopamine treatment is indicated as ActP. No statistical analysis was performed.



FIG. 4 shows a radar diagram showing the profile of dopamine effects on pacemaker potentials along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention. All data show the mean percentage change in slow-wave features, including the dominant frequency (DF); average frequency (AF); percentage of brady-rhythm, normal rhythm, and tachy-rhythm; dominant power (DP); average amplitude, slope, and period of the waveform; average propagation velocity; detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) fluctuation function with small window scale 3-25 and large window scale 26-46; sample entropy (SampEn) with small window scale 1-5 and large window scale 6-50; and the total change in activation time pattern (ActP). The radar diagram provides an immediate indication of how dopamine affects GI pacemaker activity across selected parameters in one graph. For example, at the AF, the red and purple lines (stomach and colon) lie above the line ‘0’, while the blue and green lines (duodenum and ileum) lie below line 0, indicating a potential tissue-segment-dependent effect of dopamine. To determine whether there are significant differences, p-values obtained using paired Student's t-tests can be used to compare pre- and post-treatment recordings (see Table 2).



FIG. 5A-5D illustrate an example application of a drug database built under the standardized methodologies according to an embodiment of the subject invention. A clustergram showing the 24 slow-wave features extracted from the duodenal data for a list of drugs (FIG. 5A) with known nausea-inducing or non-nausea-inducing properties and (FIG. 5B) known to be agonists or antagonists of the dopamine receptor. Features extracted with significant differences between (FIG. 5C) the nausea-inducing and non-nausea-inducing drugs and (FIG. 5D) the dopamine agonists and antagonists. All data and error bars represent the means and standard deviations, respectively. Significant differences between the two groups are indicated as ‘*’ for p<0.05, ‘**’ for p<0.01, and ‘***’ for p<0.001 (unpaired Student's t-tests).



FIG. 6 illustrates the mRNA expression of dopamine receptors in Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention.


GelRed® electrophoresis of PCR amplification products with expected sizes of 122, 216, 156, and 169 bp for dopamine receptor subtypes D1-D4 in the brain, stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon of Suncus murinus.



FIGS. 7A-7I illustrate representative spatio-temporal maps showing the effects of 100 M dopamine on the stomach, and the effects of 10 μM dopamine on the duodenum, ileum, and colon of Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention. Spatio-temporal maps were generated by aligning raw traces extracted from a vertical or horizontal line of electrodes (total of eight electrodes), with a 0.2 mm gap between each electrode. The y-axis represents the distance in mm. One minute of representative data were extracted from the baseline and post-treatment recordings.



FIG. 8 illustrates representative raw traces showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on the stomach, and the effects of 10 μM dopamine on the duodenum, ileum, and colon of Suncus murinus according to an embodiment of the subject invention. Sixty seconds of stomach and 20 s of intestinal raw traces were directly exported from unfiltered raw data recorded from the MEA. The troughs were manually aligned at the time segment extracted to allow better visualization.



FIGS. 9A-9F illustrate representative data collected on ferrets according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIG. 10 illustrates representative raw data collected on rats according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIGS. 11A and 11B illustrate representative progression of screen shots from a video clip showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on wave propagation in the stomach according to an embodiment of the subject invention at (FIG. 11A) baseline and (FIG. 11B) after drug treatment. The duration of the video is 30 s, with a frame rate of 10 and a ½ playback speed. The amplitude is normalized to the maximum amplitude in the baseline recording for each channel.



FIGS. 12A and 12B illustrate representative progression of screen shots from a video clip showing the effects of 100 μM dopamine on wave propagation in the colon according to an embodiment of the subject invention at (FIG. 12A) baseline and (FIG. 12B) after drug treatment. The duration of the video is 30 s, with a frame rate of 10 and a ½ playback speed. The amplitude is normalized to the maximum amplitude in the baseline recording for each channel.



FIGS. 13A and 13B illustrate a flow chart showing the process from dataset preparation, to ML model training, to prediction result refinement for generating different types of ML models according to an embodiment of the subject invention.



FIGS. 14A-14C illustrate model comparisons according to an embodiment of the subject invention. (FIG. 14A) The prediction accuracy of models built using different dataset preparations for refined selected-AEs (n=10-13); (FIG. 14B) The prediction accuracy of different tissue models. ‘All’ column indicates average of all 4-tissue-type (n=2,016) and ‘Intestine’ column indicates average of 3 intestinal segments except stomach (n=1,554), stomach and ileum (n=462), duodenum and colon (n=546); (FIG. 14C) The prediction accuracy of model trained using different classification algorithms (n=336). Data represents the mean±S.D. Significant differences are indicated as * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 using paired t-tests.



FIGS. 15A-15L illustrate excitatory and Inhibitory correlations to GI pacemaker activity in selected-AEs according to an embodiment of the subject invention. The percentage change of selected features in various AE-inducing drugs and non-AE-inducing drugs. Data represents the mean±S.D. Significant differences are indicated as * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 using unpaired t-tests (n=46-1,326).



FIGS. 16A-16D illustrate selected GI pacemaker features correlated with AEs according to an embodiment of the subject invention. (FIG. 16A) Network graph clustering selected drugs by refined EFs to an example AE: constipation. The length of black arrow represents how good the model can distinguish between positive-correlated features and negative-correlated features in constipation (shaded in yellow). Blue arrow and Red arrow has a short distance to positive-correlated features of constipation, where these two drugs ondansetron (“ond”) and morphine (“mor”) are known in market to induce constipation. Drugs acting on similar receptors, such as prostaglandin E1 (“pge1”) and prostaglandin E2 (“pge2”) or substance P (“sp”) and neurokinin A (“nka”) are clustered close to each other based on EF drug profile (shaded in yellow) (FIGS. 16B-D) The percentage change of selected features compared between AE-inducing drugs and non-AE-inducing drugs in (FIG. 16B) GI-related AEs including abdominal distension, upset stomach, and abdominal cramps, (FIG. 16C) psychology-related AEs, including anxiety and depression, and (FIG. 16D) Cardiovascular-related AEs including hypotension and hypertension. As demonstrated in this embodiment, the drug EF profile can be used to predict drug targets (e.g., PGE1 and PGE2 are acting on similar receptors, and they were clustered together in FIG. 16A.) Embodiments can determine both adverse effects and drug targets (i.e., potential therapeutic effects). Embodiments include predicting both bad and good effects of certain drugs, either together in the same analysis steps, or in separate analyses advantageously performed sequentially, serially, or asynchronously according to technical or commercial needs. Data represents the mean±S.D. Significant differences are indicated as * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 using unpaired t-tests (n=228-1,300). NKA: neurokinin A; LPS: lipopolysaccharides.


Materials and Methods

All patents, patent applications, provisional applications, and publications referred to or cited herein are incorporated by reference in their entirety, including all figures and tables, to the extent they are not inconsistent with the explicit teachings of this specification.


Following are examples that illustrate procedures for practicing the invention. These examples should not be construed as limiting. All percentages are by weight and all solvent mixture proportions are by volume unless otherwise noted.


Embodiments of the subject invention address the technical problem of predicting drug interactions and adverse effects being expensive, time consuming, and unpredictable. This problem is addressed by providing a standardized protocol to evaluate acute drug effects on gastrointestinal (GI) pacemaker activity using an index and guidelines on the potential effects of drugs to induce GI dysfunction using a standardized and efficient method for prediction using a learning model based on a novel database built using a standardized methodology, in which a machine learning method applying a combination of advanced techniques is utilized to predict drug adverse effects.


The transitional term “comprising,” “comprises,” or “comprise” is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps. By contrast, the transitional phrase “consisting of” excludes any element, step, or ingredient not specified in the claim. The phrases “consisting” or “consists essentially of” indicate that the claim encompasses embodiments containing the specified materials or steps and those that do not materially affect the basic and novel characteristic(s) of the claim. Use of the term “comprising” contemplates other embodiments that “consist” or “consisting essentially of” the recited component(s).


When ranges are used herein, such as for dose ranges, combinations and subcombinations of ranges (e.g., subranges within the disclosed range), specific embodiments therein are intended to be explicitly included. When the term “about” is used herein, in conjunction with a numerical value, it is understood that the value can be in a range of 95% of the value to 105% of the value, i.e., the value can be +/−5% of the stated value. For example, “about 1 kg” means from 0.95 kg to 1.05 kg.


The methods and processes described herein can be embodied as code and/or data. The software code and data described herein can be stored on one or more machine-readable media (e.g., computer-readable media), which may include any device or medium that can store code and/or data for use by a computer system. When a computer system and/or processor reads and executes the code and/or data stored on a computer-readable medium, the computer system and/or processor performs the methods and processes embodied as data structures and code stored within the computer-readable storage medium.


It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that computer-readable media include removable and non-removable structures/devices that can be used for storage of information, such as computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules, and other data used by a computing system/environment. A computer-readable medium includes, but is not limited to, volatile memory such as random access memories (RAM, DRAM, SRAM); and non-volatile memory such as flash memory, various read-only-memories (ROM, PROM, EPROM, EEPROM), magnetic and ferromagnetic/ferroelectric memories (MRAM, FeRAM), and magnetic and optical storage devices (hard drives, magnetic tape, CDs, DVDs); network devices; or other media now known or later developed that are capable of storing computer-readable information/data. Computer-readable media should not be construed or interpreted to include any propagating signals. A computer-readable medium of embodiments of the subject invention can be, for example, a compact disc (CD), digital video disc (DVD), flash memory device, volatile memory, or a hard disk drive (HDD), such as an external HDD or the HDD of a computing device, though embodiments are not limited thereto. A computing device can be, for example, a laptop computer, desktop computer, server, cell phone, or tablet, though embodiments are not limited thereto.


A greater understanding of the embodiments of the subject invention and of their many advantages may be had from the following examples, given by way of illustration. The following examples are illustrative of some of the methods, applications, embodiments, and variants of the present invention. They are, of course, not to be considered as limiting the invention. Numerous changes and modifications can be made with respect to embodiments of the invention.


Example 1—Exemplary Measurement of Dopamine According to an Embodiment of the Subject Invention

Pacemaker potentials were recorded extracellularly on a 60-channel MEA system using full-thickness GI segments isolated from Suncus murinus. Basic slow-wave parameters, including frequency, amplitude, slope, period, and power partitions, were derived. Signal regularity was also evaluated using detrended fluctuation analysis and sample entropy analysis. Signal propagation, velocity, and activation time patterns were also constructed and compared before and after treatment with dopamine (0.1-100 μM).


Results showed that dopamine (1-10 μM) significantly reduced the dominant power, amplitude, and slope of the waveforms, but increased the period of the waveforms in tissue segments taken from the ileum and duodenum. In stomach segments, dopamine (100 μM) significantly increased the average frequency, signal irregularity, and tachy-rhythm percentage. Dopamine had biphasic effects on tissues taken from the colon, in which frequencies shifted towards a tachy-rhythm at 1-10 μM, but towards a brady-rhythm at 100 μM. Dopamine had a unique effect on the propagation of slow waves in tissues taken from the ileum and duodenum, being active at 100 nM and 100 μM, but not at intermediate doses from 1 to 10 μM. This indicates that dopamine can have a biphasic effect on slow waves in the upper gut.


Conclusions included dopamine differentially modulated slow waves in the GI tract and its tissue-specific profile can be related to its known side effect profile of nausea, emesis, and constipation. Slow-wave network analysis can generate new information on drug mechanisms affecting GI pacemaker activity. Data and methodology from this study can be beneficially applied, e.g., to compile a database to assist drug discovery and development.


Abbreviations referenced in these examples and throughout the specification can include the following, AF: average frequency; DF: dominant frequency; DFA: detrended fluctuation analysis; DP: dominant power; GI: gastrointestinal; ICCs: interstitial cells of Cajal; MEA: microelectrode array; PD: Parkinson's disease; SampEn: sample entropy; STM: spatio-temporal map; TAM: time activation map.


Example 2—Detailed Study of Embodiments of the Subject Invention

New drugs are being developed for a wide variety of diseases. Following peripheral administration, drugs reach a variety of cell types, including those in the GI tract, by either absorption following oral or rectal administration or indirectly following distribution after parenteral administration. Interactions with the GI tract can result in dyspepsia and/or nausea and emesis via the disturbance of slow waves. It would be advantageous to be able to predict the GI-tract side effect profile of novel drugs, based on their known pharmacological profile, prior to experiments in whole animals or humans.


Most of the novel chemical entities are tested in vitro or ex vivo to determine whether they either contract or relax GI tissues. However, such experiments do not necessarily predict whether a drug has emetic liability or is likely to cause constipation or diarrhoea. For example, some drugs that inhibit contractions of the GI tract (e.g., anti-cholinergics, antihistamines) are anti-emetic, whilst others (e.g., opioids) are emetic. Gastric dysrhythmia can be associated with nausea and emesis, but it is technically difficult to study the effects of drugs on the electrical properties of the GI tract. Therefore, these experiments are not performed routinely and data from different laboratories have usually been generated under disparate experimental conditions, making associations with side effects unclear.


Dysrhythmia involves an alteration of rhythmic slow-wave pacemaker activity that is generated by interstitial cells of Cajal (ICCs). ICCs are located along the GI tract and they regulate peristalsis and motility. Hundreds of receptors are expressed on ICCs, and thousands of receptors are expressed on enteric neurons and smooth muscle cells, which interact with ICCs [1-3]. Drugs and/or mediators can interact with any of the receptors expressed within the GI to modulate or disrupt pacemaker activity. The inventors have established techniques to record slow waves in isolated GI tissues. To permit stable recordings over a microelectrode array (MEA), nifedipine (1 μM) is added to paralyse smooth muscle movement, while other receptors, ion channels, and cell-to-cell interactions remain intact to better model normal GI physiology. Slow-wave signals are then reliably recorded in the isolated GI tissue using a standard 60-channel MEA platform.


In this study, the inventors used Suncus murinus, the house musk shrew, as it is commonly used in anti-emetic research and it has tissues that produce more reliable pacemaker potential recordings than tissues from rodents. Moreover, rodents are incapable of emesis and therefore, have a lower translational value [4]. The data generated from the MEA platform were blinded and processed through a programmed slow-wave network analytical pipeline to derive slow-wave features, including frequency, amplitude, slope, period, power partition, activation times, propagation velocity, propagation pattern, waveform stability, and variability, which were used to construct a comprehensive pharmacological profile of the tested drug on various GI tissue sections. Dopamine was tested at 0.1-100 μM in the stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon to collect data for the compilation of a database. The database was then subdivided into groups for classification machine learning to identify slow-wave features that differentiate between non-nausea-inducing and nausea-inducing drugs or between dopamine agonists and antagonists. It is contemplated within the scope of certain embodiments of the subject invention that the addition of further data sets to the database will continue to increase the power to predict mechanisms, therapeutic uses, and/or side effects.


Dopamine is well-known to modulate gut motility, but it has restricted use because of its side effect profile and relatively short half-life. However, dopamine receptor antagonists are established for treating gastric dysmotility, nausea, and emesis in humans [5,6]. Whilst the peripherally acting dopamine receptor antagonist, domperidone, is used to treat gastroparesis and gastroesophageal reflux, it is less effective at treating colon dysmotility [7], suggesting that dopamine is involved mainly in the upper GI tract in certain pathological conditions. However, constipation, which mainly involves the lower GI tract, is common in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) [8,9]. Whilst dopamine agonists improve the PD symptoms associated with the central nervous system, some studies indicate that they tend to worsen constipation [8,10]. Therefore, the inventors hypothesised that dopamine can have differential actions on the GI tract due to region-specific effects on pacemaker activity and that this can, in turn, be a consequence of differences in the regional distribution of dopamine receptor subtypes.


Adult Suncus murinus (female, weighing 40-50 g) were obtained from the Laboratory Animal Services Centre, the Chinese University of Hong Kong. The animals were housed in plastic cages (1-5 per cage) in a temperature-(24±1° C.) and humidity (50±5%)-controlled room with artificial lighting provided from 06:00 to 18:00 h. Water and dry, pelleted cat chow (TriPro Feline Formula; American Pet Nutrition, Ogden, UT, USA) were given ad libitum. All experiments were conducted under a licence from the Government of the Hong Kong SAR and with permission from the Animal Experimentation Ethics Committee, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. The inventors used a randomisation protocol to test different concentrations of dopamine. Ten animals were used in this study.


Solutions and drugs included Krebs' medium (in mM: NaCl, 115; KCl, 4.7; KH2PO4, 1.2; MgSO4·7H2O, 1.2; CaCl2·2H2O, 2.5; glucose, 10; NaHCO3, 25) used for all tissue manipulations. 3-Hydroxytyramine hydrochloride (dopamine) was purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology (Dallas, TX, USA), dissolved in distilled water to a concentration of 100 mM, and stored at −20° C. in aliquots. Dopamine was freshly diluted to the desired concentrations each day using freshly prepared Krebs' medium.


Electrical recordings were taken after the animals were euthanised by carbon dioxide asphyxiation. The entire GI tract was harvested and incubated at room temperature in Krebs' medium enriched with 95% 02 and 5% C02. The mesentery was removed, and the lumen contents were flushed with Krebs' medium. Segments (−1 cm) of duodenum, ileum, and colon were then isolated, but the stomach was kept intact. All tissue segments and the entire stomach were incubated in Krebs' medium containing nifedipine (1 μM; Sigma Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA) for 15 min to inhibit smooth muscle activity. Pacemaker potentials were recorded using an MEA platform (MEA1060 1200×; Multichannel Systems, Reutlingen, Germany) as previously described [4]. Briefly, tissues were placed onto the electrode field of an MEA chip (60-channel, 8×8 configuration, 3D-tip-shaped electrodes with a height of 30 m and an inter-electrode distance of 200 μm; Ayanda Biosystems SA, Lausanne, Switzerland). Intestinal segments were aligned horizontally to the recording electrode field, while the stomach was oriented with the antrum facing the recording electrode field. The chamber temperature was maintained at 37° C. and the sampling frequency was 1 kHz. Five-minute baseline recordings were followed by 7-min recordings after the addition of dopamine. Specifically, duodenum, ileum, and colon sections were incubated with dopamine at 100 nM, 1 μM, 10 μM, and 100 μM. Due to the limited number of stomachs available and ethical issues, only one concentration of dopamine (100 μM) was tested on the stomach. All data were recorded and saved using MC_Rack (v 4.6.2, Multichannel Systems).


Data analysis included basic slow-wave feature extraction using a custom automated program. Raw data were converted into hierarchical data format version 5 (HDF5) file format, and imported into MATLAB (2020a/b, 2021a; Mathworks, Natick, MA, USA). The time point of drug administration was automatically identified based on the signal disturbance. The period of signal disturbance (20 s before and 40 s after the peak of the disturbance) was excluded from the analysis. Data were filtered using a passband between 0.1 Hz and 1 Hz and a stopband between 0.01 Hz and 2 Hz. The basic slow-wave features extracted were similar to those extracted in the inventors' previous studies [4,11,12]. However, instead of using several templates and scripts written in Microsoft Excel and Spike 2, a one-step automatic and blinded MATLAB programme was used for data analysis. There were four major changes to the data analysis process as compared to the inventors' previous studies [4,11,12]. First, auto-identification of the drug disturbance time point was used, rather than manual identification. Second, standardised signal filters were built in MATLAB to match the entire data analysis pipeline. Similar to the inventors' previous study, the filtered data were subjected to fast Fourier transformation (bin size, 2048) to identify the dominant frequency (DF) and dominant power. Frequency partitioning was performed by segmenting the power spectrum of 0-50 cpm into the following four segments: brady-rhythm (within the range 2-[DF−1] cpm), normal-rhythm ([DF±1] cpm), tachy-rhythm (within the range [DF+1]-40 cpm), and out-of-range frequencies (<2 cpm and >40 cpm). Third, waveforms were identified using the MATLAB ‘findpeaks’ function, with a minimum peak height of 30 V at baseline and 20 V after drug treatment, with a step time of 5.4 s for the intestine and 12 s for the stomach. The average peak-to-peak amplitude, slope, and period were derived for all detected waveforms. Fourth, propagation velocity was derived using phase-difference measurements, based on the auto-select seed electrode with the highest percentage of normal rhythms. When comparing the old and new analytical pipelines, the numerical data derived can be slightly different, but this does not affect the significant findings of the inventors' previous studies. More importantly, the time taken to perform the analyses and the possible number of human errors and amount of bias introduced into the data analysis were significantly reduced in the new approach.


Dominant activation pattern identification included a phase-based analysis performed as previously described (Liu et al., 2021). Briefly, high-frequency spikes with amplitudes greater than 200 V were masked. Continuous frequencies were identified using continuous wavelet transformation, and the transformed data were used to plot spectrograms. Channels were eliminated from the analysis if (1) the frequency was lower than the mean±two standard deviations, (2) the power was less than 10% of the mean, or (3) the number of outliers was greater than 3. High quality data were subjected to Hilbert transformation to identify the phase and frequency of the signals. Individual activation times were clustered using k-means clustering every 20 s and major activation patterns were grouped using a structural similarity index. The major patterns were first grouped based on baseline data, and patterns in the post-dopamine treatment data were matched to the baseline groups of patterns. If no matched pattern group was identified, new groups were created. The percentage changes in the first, second, and third dominant activation patterns based on the baseline or post-treatment data were calculated and compared, which allowed the inspection of the shifting behavior of activation patterns between pre- and post-dopamine treatment data.


Signal variability analysis was conducted. The inventors have previously applied detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) and multiscale sample entropy (SampEn) analysis to evaluate signal fluctuation around the local trends and regularity of signals, respectively, in gastric myoelectric activity patterns recorded from conscious ferrets [13]. This approach was introduced in this study for the first time to analyse gastrointestinal slow-wave signals from isolated tissues measured using the MEA. This approach was useful in comparing normal and disturbed rhythms based on signal variability across time segments. DFA [14,15] and SampEn analysis [16] were performed based on previously described formulae. For DFA analysis, an averaged and extracted smaller window scale 3-25 and larger window scale 26-46 were used. For SampEn analysis, an averaged and extracted smaller window scale 1-5 and larger window scale 6-50 were used.


Statistical analyses were performed using MATLAB. Paired Student's t-tests were used to compare the baseline and post-treatment recordings. All numerical data were expressed as the means±standard deviations. A p-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant. The number of repeated experiments is indicated as ‘n’.


Graphical presentation included activation maps, spectrograms, DFA maps, and SampEn maps automatically generated for each dataset while running the data analysis programme. Representative graphs and maps were selected for publication. PRISM 8.0 (GraphPad, San Diego, CA, USA) was used to generate frequency distribution and pattern distribution maps. Selected slow-wave features were plotted on a radar diagram using Microsoft Excel.


Clustering and machine learning were conducted. Other drugs were tested and analysed using the same protocol used to test dopamine, which is described here as an example. The slow-wave features of the stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon extracted for all tested drugs and concentrations were stored in a database. The database was used for clustering and machine learning in MATLAB to help test specific hypotheses. The following two example applications of the database are given in this publication: (1) the prediction of nausea-inducing drugs and (2) the classification of drugs as dopamine receptor agonists or antagonists.


Certain mRNA expression assays were conducted as follows. Primer pairs were designed for each of the target dopamine receptor genes, dopamine receptor subtypes 1, 2, 3, and 4 (D1-D4), based on a preliminary RNA sequencing study of Suncus murinus brain, stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon (data not shown). Briefly, tissues were homogenised using a hand-held homogeniser. Forty milligrams of homogenised tissue was used for RNA extraction using TRIzol Reagent (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and cDNA was prepared using TaqMan® reverse transcription reagents (Thermo Fisher Scientific) following the manufacturer's protocols. Standard polymerase chain reactions (PCRs) were performed with denaturation and activation steps at 95° C. for 2 min; followed by 50 cycles of amplification at 95° C. for 30 s, 55° C. for 30 s, and 72° C. for 45 s; and a final elongation step at 72° C. for 5 min using GoTaq® Green Master Mix (Promega, Madison, WI, USA). Gel electrophoresis was performed using a 2% agarose gel with GelRed® Nucleic Acid Gel Stain (Thermo Fisher Scientific).


Results included certain effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials recorded from the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus, such as dominant frequency (DF) and average frequency (AF). Dopamine significantly reduced the DF of slow waves in duodenal tissues from 27.1±2.2 cpm to 24.9±1.2 cpm at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=7), and from 28.6±4.1 cpm to 26.3±5.2 cpm at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=5). No significant differences were found in the stomach at 100 μM (p>0.05, n=8) or in ileal (p>0.05, n=6-7) or colonic tissues (p>0.05, n=6-9) at 0.1-100 μM. The AF significantly increased in the stomach from 9.8±1.2 cpm to 11.8±1.8 cpm at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=8). The AF was significantly reduced in duodenal tissues from 24.1±2.0 cpm to 20.9±0.7 cpm at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=7) and from 25.1±3.7 cpm to 22.2±5.4 cpm at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=5). The AF was significantly reduced in ileal tissues from 23.5±3.0 cpm to 19.4±3.6 cpm at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=7) and in colonic tissues from 23.9±2.4 cpm to 23.3±1.6 cpm at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=7, FIG. 1A-B).


Dopamine significantly reduced the dominant power (DP) of slow waves in the stomach from 888.0±691.5 μV2 to 253.2±416.1 μV2 at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=8). The DP was significantly reduced in ileal tissues from 780.4±276.9 μV2 to 177.5±83.0 μV2 at 100 nM (p<0.001, n=7) and from 1,070.5±745.1 μV2 to 460.3±297.0 μV2 at 1 μM (p<0.05, n=7). No significant differences were found in duodenal (p>0.05, n=5-9) or colonic tissues (p>0.05, n=6-9) at 0.1-100 μM (FIG. 1C).


Average amplitude, slope, and period of waveforms were observed. Dopamine significantly reduced the amplitude of slow waves in the duodenum from 193.0±54.9 μV to 114.1±37.7 μV at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=7), from 117.6±24.2 μV to 97.4±13.7 μV at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=9), and from 199.3±60.5 μV to 121.1±27.3 μV at 100 μM (p<0.01, n=5). The amplitude was significantly reduced in ileal tissues from 165.2±20.5 μV to 119.2±20.0 μV at 100 nM (p<0.001, n=7), from 187.1±76.9 μV to 138.0±66.2 μV at 1 μM (p<0.01, n=7), and from 229.6±115.9 μV to 149.1±56.7 μV at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=6). The amplitude was significantly reduced in colonic tissues from 267.3±80.9 μV to 199.7±48.8 μV at 100 μM (p<0.01, n=6). No significant differences were found in the stomach at 100 μM (p>0.05, n=8, FIG. 1D).


Dopamine significantly reduced the slope in duodenal tissues from 321.7±95.5 μV s−1 to 166.9±57.7 μV s−1 at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=7), from 202.4±50.6 μV s−1 to 153.9±47.7 μV s−1 at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=9), and from 322.2±108.6 μV s−1 to 182.5±61.7 μV s−1 at 100 μM (p<0.01, n=5). The slope was significantly reduced in ileal tissues from 257.5±59.8 μV s−1 to 160.1±42.0 μV s−1 at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=7), from 300.9±117.5 μV s−1 to 204.4±91.9 μV s−1 at 1 μM (p<0.01, n=7), and from 383.7±185.8 μV s−1 to 238.2±95.7 μV s−1 at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=6). The slope was significantly reduced in colonic tissues from 439.3±124.3 μV s−1 to 299.0±76.5 μV s−1 at 100 μM (p<0.001, n=6). No significant differences were found in the stomach at 100 μM (p>0.05, n=8, FIG. 1E).


Dopamine significantly reduced the waveform period in duodenal tissues from 2.52±0.21 s to 3.27±0.47 s at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=7) and from 2.44±0.72 s to 3.26±1.29 s at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=5). The waveform period was significantly increased in ileal tissues from 2.66±0.40 to 3.73±1.05 at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=7), from 2.53±0.50 s to 3.10±0.74 sat 1 M (p<0.05, n=7), and from 2.30±0.18 s to 3.05±0.68 s at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=6). No significant differences were found in the stomach at 100 μM (p>0.05, n=8) or in colonic tissues at 0.1-100 μM (p>0.05, n=6-9, FIG. 1F).


Dopamine did not affect propagation velocities in the stomach at 100 μM (p>0.05, n=8) or in duodenal (p>0.05, n=5-9), ileal (p>0.05, n=6-7), or colonic tissues (p>0.05, n=6-9) at 0.1-100 μM (FIG. 1G).


Dopamine significantly reduced the DFA fluctuation function (smaller scale 3-25) from 2.36±0.08 to 2.27±0.16 at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=7) in the stomach; reduced from 2.65±0.08 to 2.51±0.05 at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=6), from 2.26±0.16 to 2.18±0.16 at 100 M (p<0.05, n=9) in duodenal tissues; reduced from 2.35±0.14 to 2.28±0.11 at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=6), from 2.29±0.23 to 2.19±0.20 at 1 M (p<0.05, n=8), from 2.24±0.32 to 2.13±0.34 at 10 M (p<0.05, n=8), from 2.35±0.12 to 2.25±0.05 at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=7) in ileal tissues; reduced from 2.37±0.07 to 2.26±0.06 at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=6), from 2.30±0.33 to 2.23±0.34 at 1 μM (p<0.05, n=8), from 2.24±0.23 to 2.11±0.27 at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=6), from 2.31±0.12 to 2.19±0.13 at 100 μM in colonic tissues (FIG. 1H).


Dopamine significantly reduced the DFA fluctuation function (larger scale 26-46) from 2.17±0.07 to 1.98±0.11 at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=6), from 1.74±0.32 to 1.63±0.38 at 1 μM (p<0.05, n=7), from 1.46±0.29 to 1.36±0.31 at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=9) at duodenal tissues; reduced from 1.71±0.17 to 1.55±0.13 at 100 nM (p<0.05, n=6), from 1.78±0.24 to 1.64±0.28 at 1 μM (p<0.05, n=8), from 1.63±0.23 to 1.43±0.21 at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=7) at ileal tissues; reduced from 1.80±0.09 to 1.58±0.11 at 100 nM (p<0.001, n=6), from 1.74±0.26 to 1.61±0.29 at 1 M (p<0.01, n=8), from 1.73±0.16 to 1.53±0.19 at 10 M (p<0.05, n=6), from 1.63±0.19 to 1.46±0.21 at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=10) at colonic tissues. Dopamine did not change the DFA fluctuation function (larger scale 26-46) at the stomach at 100 μM (p>0.05, n=7) (FIG. 1I).


Dopamine significantly increased the average SampEn (smaller scale 1-5) from 0.58±0.05 to 0.60±0.04 at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=7) in duodenal tissues; increased from 0.59±0.03 to 0.62±0.03 at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=6), from 0.57±0.06 to 0.59±0.05 at 1 M (p<0.01, n=8), from 0.57±0.06 to 0.60±0.04 at 10 μM (p<0.05, n=6) in colonic tissues. Dopamine did not change the average SampEn (smaller scale 1-5) at the stomach at 100 uM (p>0.05, n=7) and in ileal tissues at 0.1-100 μM (p>0.05, n=6-8) (FIG. 1J).


Dopamine significantly reduced the average SampEn (larger scale 6-50) from 0.33±0.06 to 0.28±0.07 at 100 nM (p<0.01, n=6) in colonic tissues. Dopamine did not change the average SampEn (larger scale 6-50) at the stomach at 100 uM (p>0.05, n=7), in duodenal tissues at 0.1-100 μM (p>0.05, n=6-9), in ileal tissues at 0.1-100 μM (p>0.05, n=6-8) (FIG. 1K).


To allow visual and statistical analyses of the shifting behavior of frequencies after dopamine treatment, the power spectrum was segmented into percentages of brady-, normal-, and tachy-rhythm ranges, as shown in FIGS. 2A and 2B for the stomach and intestinal (colon) data. These data are presented graphically in stacked histograms (FIG. 2C).


In the stomach, dopamine at 100 μM significantly decreased the percentage of normal rhythms from 55.1±7.2% to 23.6±13.1% (p<0.01, n=8) and significantly increased the percentage of tachy-rhythms from 36.1±12.8% to 60.2±15.4% (p<0.05, n=8).


In duodenal tissues, dopamine increased the percentage of brady-rhythms from 35.7±10.3% to 87.2±7.7% (p<0.0001, n=7) at 100 nM, from 25.8±12.3% to 53.7±26.6% (p<0.05, n=6) at 1 μM, and from 43.3±11.6% to 68.6±29.0% (p<0.05, n=5) at 100 μM. The percentage of normal rhythms in duodenal tissues significantly decreased from 46.1±11.2% to 4.8±4.6% (p<0.001, n=7) at 100 nM and from 52.4±14.7% to 7.8±6.4% (p<0.05, n=9) at 10 μM, whereas the percentage of tachy-rhythms significantly decreased from 12.5±5.7% to 2.1±0.7% (p<0.05, n=7) at 100 nM and from 11.0±5.2% to 5.4±4.9% (p<0.05, n=5) at 100 M.


In ileal tissues, dopamine increased the percentage of brady-rhythms from 31.8±11.7% to 60.0±26.0% (p<0.05, n=7) at 100 nM, from 27.5±7.8% to 46.3±22.7% (p<0.05, n=7) at 1 μM, and from 32.8±12.9% to 63.3±28.5% (p<0.05, n=6) at 10 μM. Meanwhile, the percentage of normal rhythms significantly decreased from 46.1±5.6% to 4.8±17.0% (p<0.01, n=7) at 100 nM, from 50.6±10.8% to 24.5±11.8% (p<0.01, n=7) at 1 μM, and from 50.9±9.8% to 9.2±10.9% (p<0.0001, n=6) at 10 μM.


In colonic tissues, dopamine increased the percentage of brady-rhythms from 34.7±9.1% to 53.9±26.8% (p<0.05, n=6) at 100 μM, but significantly decreased the percentage of normal rhythms from 41.4±9.7% to 14.5±18.1% (p<0.01, n=6) at 1 μM, from 42.4±6.9% to 13.1±17.4% (p<0.05, n=9) at 10 μM, and from 53.1±8.1% to 33.4±23.3% (p<0.05, n=6) at 100 μM. The percentage of tachy-rhythms in colonic tissues significantly increased from 18.3±12.6% to 55.5±34.8% (p<0.05, n=6) at 1 μM dopamine.


Power spectra were also plotted against time to generate spectrograms. Representative spectrograms are shown in FIGS. 2D and 2E. Eleven minutes of data were plotted. Drug administration artefacts were seen in the spectrograms at the point of delivery at 5 min. In the stomach, dopamine (100 μM) reduced the DP of the DF, which translated to a reduced power spectral density from red to green and yellow. In duodenal tissues, the DF was slightly shifted towards a lower frequency by dopamine (10 μM). For ileal tissues, two representative spectrograms are shown. The spectrogram on the left shows that the DF was slightly shifted towards a higher frequency by dopamine (10 μM). The spectrogram on the right shows extra peaks appearing to the left of the baseline DF following dopamine (10 μM) administration, which was consistent with the overall decrease in the percentage of frequencies in the brady-rhythm range (above). In colonic tissues, extra peaks appeared to the right of the original DF after dopamine (10 μM) administration, which was consistent with the overall increase in the percentage of frequencies in the tachy-rhythm range (above). A limitation of this type of graphical analysis is that it only allows one representative channel from the recordings to be shown in each figure. In these examples, the inventors identified two effects of drug treatment on the final DF or AF. The first effect was an overall shift in the DF peak, and the second effect was the appearance of extra peaks at a different frequency than the frequency of the original DF.


Certain effects of dopamine on activation pattern distributions were observed. The three most dominant clustered groups of activation patterns were identified for each dataset based on their respective baseline (FIG. 3A “(i) Baseline”) and post-treatment data (FIG. 3B “(ii) Post-drug”). The post-treatment activation patterns were matched based on baseline-clustered groups (FIG. 3C “(iii) Distribution of Activation Pattern”). In this example, duodenal tissue was treated with 100 μM dopamine and the major patterns were shifted towards the minor patterns found in the baseline data. One new clustered activation pattern group was also formed, and the major patterns found in the baseline data were largely reduced. Using this analytical method to cluster and group activation patterns for all datasets, the percentages of the three most dominant patterns, based on baseline data (FIG. 3D), and the percentages of the three most dominant patterns, based on post-treatment data (FIG. 3E), were derived and plotted in a stacked histogram. Note that between each dataset, the dominant activation patterns were different. The major aim of this type of analysis was to derive the percentage change in the dominant activation patterns between pre- and post-treatment data, which represents the degree to which a drug disrupts the original (baseline) propagation pattern of pacemaker activities, and to create new propagation patterns of pacemaker activities based on post-treatment data.


In duodenal tissues, dopamine decreased the percentage of dominant baseline patterns from 32.3±11.8% to 11.1±13.0% (p<0.01, n=7) and from 23.3±5.7% to 8.4±11.2% (p<0.05, n=7) for the first and second patterns, respectively, at 100 nM; from 33.7±13.1% to 12.8±9.4% for the first pattern at 1 μM (p<0.05, n=6); and from 29.3±5.5% to 7.0±7.0% (p<0.01, n=4), 20.7±5.4% to 7.4±4.1% (p<0.05, n=4), and 15.2±2.1% to 5.9±3.6% (p<0.05, n=4) for the first, second, and third patterns, respectively, at 100 μM.


In ileal tissues, dopamine decreased the percentage of dominant patterns from 32.8±5.7% to 3.8±4.5% (p<0.01, n=7), 21.5±1.7% to 2.6±1.6% (p<0.0001, n=7), and 17.2±4.8% to 2.2±2.6% (p<0.0001, n=7) for the first, second, and third patterns, respectively, at 100 nM; from 35.2±6.0% to 13.0±6.7% (p<0.001, n=6) for the first pattern at 1 μM; from 35.7±8.4% to 19.2±16.4% (p<0.05, n=5) for the first pattern at 10 μM; and from 27.6±4.1% to 9.4±9.5% (p<0.01, n=4), 23.5±2.8% to 5.7±5.1% (p<0.001, n=4), and 19.1±2.8% to 5.9±6.6% (p<0.01, n=4) for the first, second, and third patterns, respectively, at 100 μM.


In colonic tissues, dopamine reduced the percentage of dominant patterns from 34.4±3.7% to 11.4±12.9% (p<0.01, n=4) for the first pattern at 100 μM. No significant differences were found in the percentage of dominant patterns compared with those at baseline in the stomach at 100 μM (p>0.05, n=4, FIG. 3D).


In duodenal tissues, the percentage of dominant patterns significantly increased from 10.2±9.1% to 18.5±2.3% (p<0.05, n=5) for the second pattern at 10 μM, and decreased from 20.3±10.8% to 7.5±5.8% (p<0.05, n=4) for the third pattern at 100 μM.


In ileal tissues, the percentage of dominant patterns significantly decreased from 15.6±10.3% to 4.2±4.2% (p<0.05, n=7), 16.8±6.6% to 3.0±2.6% (p<0.01, n=7) for the second and third patterns, respectively, at 100 nM; increased from 8.9±9.0% to 31.4±13.7% (p<0.01, n=6) for the first pattern at 1 μM; increased from 17.2±11.5% to 32.3±13.2% (p<0.05, n=5) for the first pattern at 10 μM; and decreased from 17.8±7.4% to 6.8±6.1% (p<0.05, n=4) for the third pattern at 100 μM.


In colonic tissues, the percentage of dominant patterns significantly increased from 19.1±12.2% to 39.6±15.6% (p<0.05, n=6) for the first pattern at 1 μM, and decreased from 20.3±10.8% to 7.5±5.8% (p<0.0001, n=5) for the third pattern at 100 μM. No significant differences were found in the percentage of dominant patterns in the stomach at 100 μM compared to those at baseline (p>0.05, n=4, FIG. 3E).


Dopamine increased the number of groups of patterns recorded from the stomach from 4.3±1.0 to 5.3±1.0 at 100 μM (p<0.05, n=8). In duodenal tissues, the number of groups of patterns significantly increased from 6.2±1.0 to 6.8±1.0 (p<0.05, n=6) at 1 μM and from 5.9±0.7 to 6.4±0.5 (p<0.05, n=9) at 10 μM. In ileal tissues, the number of groups of patterns significantly increased from 6.3±0.8 to 7±0.8 (p<0.05, n=7) at 1 μM and decreased from 9.3±0.7±to 6.9±1.0 (p<0.05, n=6) at 10 μM. In colonic tissues, the number of groups of patterns significantly increased from 5.4±1.0 to 6.4±1.1 (p<0.05, n=6) at 1 μM and from 6±0.7 to 6.8±1.1 (p<0.05, n=9) at 10 μM (FIG. 3F).


The total percentage change for all activation patterns is denoted as ActP in FIG. 3G. This value was obtained by calculating the difference between baseline and post-treatment data. No statistical analysis was performed for this value. However, the value can be compared with a vehicle treatment control.


Other conventional types of graphical presentations of wave propagation were constructed. The activation time patterns described herein represent one method to present wave propagation. Another common method is the use of spatio-temporal maps (STMs). In STMs, the x- and y-axes represent the time and the distance of a line of interest, respectively, while the z-axis (colour scale) represents the amplitude (FIGS. 7A-7I). The ‘line of interest’ represents a selected line of electrodes (either vertical or horizontal) across the MEA electrode field. For the 60-electrode MEA used in this study, the maximum distance of a horizontal or vertical line was 1.4 mm, with an inter-electrode distance of 0.2 mm, which represents the resolution of the y-axis of the STM. It is also possible to choose a slope line, but this requires the inter-electrode distance to be adjusted to 0.28 mm. In the STM, the centre of the white zone is where the peak of a waveform is located, while the centre of the black zone is where the trough of a waveform is located. Due to the very fine resolution of the inventors' MEA chip, the wave front of the peaks and troughs of the STM appeared at almost the same time. Slightly tilted wave fronts were observed in some cases, indicating leading or lagging propagation of the same wave front with time. The denser the appearance of the white and black zones, the higher the frequency of pacemaker potentials. In the representative STM for the stomach (FIGS. 7A-7I), approximately 9 and 10 wave fronts were counted before and after dopamine treatment (100 μM), respectively, indicating an increase in frequency. The number of wave fronts counted directly represented 9 cpm and 10 cpm within the specific time segment, because the x-axis showed an exact 1 min interval in these STMs. In duodenal tissues, 30 and 27 wave fronts were found before and after dopamine treatment (10 μM), indicating a decrease in frequency. Moreover, given the scale of amplitude indicated by the colour bar, the amplitudes of pacemaker potentials were reduced from the white and black zones towards the green and yellow zones. Similarly, 26 and 30 wave fronts were found in ileal tissues and 32 and 32 wave fronts were found in colonic tissues before and after dopamine (10 μM) treatment, respectively. A limitation of this method of presentation is that only one line of electrodes and one specific time frame can be used as representative data, and data from the other 50+ electrodes cannot be included.


To overcome this limitation, a video or a series of time-lapse images can be produced to represent all 60 channels of data (e.g., as shown in FIGS. 11A-12B). Amplitudes were normalised to the maximum amplitudes found within the baseline recordings. In these videos, the spread of the peak events (white zone) or the trough events (black zone) across the MEA recording area can be seen in slow motion (½ time). In the stomach, two slightly unsynchronised populations of pacemaker potentials were found in the baseline data (FIG. 11A). After dopamine treatment (100 M), wave propagation was inhibited, and amplitudes were reduced (FIG. 11B). The shift between white and black dominant time was faster in colonic tissues than in the stomach, indicating a higher pacemaker frequency (FIGS. 12A and 12B). The peaks (white zone) were propagated from left to right at baseline. The propagation direction and speed were relatively constant before and after dopamine treatment (10 μM). These videos are useful for visualising pacemaker activity propagation before and after drug treatment.


Conventional raw traces inspection was performed. Most electrophysiological studies using a single microelectrode or patch-clamp techniques permit the recording of basic raw traces, from which data can be extracted and examined (FIG. 8). However, it is important to emphasise that pacemaker potentials recorded using the MEA technique are extracellular potentials. They can present as numerous shapes, as they are affected by interference from waves generated from a network of ICCs. It is possible to inspect raw traces to visually derive frequency and amplitude changes. However, this is generally done for one channel at a time within a specific time segment and within one experiment.


The pharmacological profile of dopamine on GI pacemaker activities was observed. The following 15 slow-wave signal features were selected and plotted in a radar diagram representing the pharmacological profile of dopamine on GI pacemaker activities: (1) DF, (2) AF, and (3) DP; the power distribution as a percentage of (4) brady-rhythm, (5) normal rhythm, and (6) tachy-rhythm range frequencies; the average (7) amplitude, (8) slope, and (9) period of the waveforms; (10) propagation velocity; (11) average of the extracted scales of DFA fluctuation function; (scale 3-25); (12) average of the extracted scales of DFA fluctuation function (scale 26-46); (13) SampEn; (scale 1-5); (14) SampEn (scale 6-50); and (15) the total percentage change of all activation patterns (ActP, FIG. 4). All values shown in FIG. 4 indicate the percentage changes of each of the 15 signal features. This radar diagram provides an immediate indication of how dopamine affects GI pacemaker activity in one graph. For example, at the AF, the red and purple lines (stomach and colon) lie above the line ‘0’, while the blue and green lines (duodenum and ileum) lie below line 0, indicating there can be a tissue-segment-dependent effect of dopamine. To determine whether there are significant differences, p-values obtained using paired Student's t-tests can be used to compare pre- and post-treatment recordings (see Table 2).


Database design and construction was undertaken. All numerical data were stored in database files containing the values of all of the slow-wave features extracted above, including but not limited to the date of each experiment, the sequences of the experiment, the tissue type, the drug name, the drug dose, the number of active channels, the number of repeats for each experiment, the means, the standard deviations, and the p-values of statistical analyses. All numerical values for experiments using dopamine are presented in Table 2 as an example. Note that in some datasets, the propagation velocity and the activation pattern were not derived if the number of active channels after filtering was too low, while the other features were preserved for data analysis. All of the other drugs the inventors have previously tested, or will test in the future, can be stored in a similar manner in the database. The database can then be subjected to machine learning to test specific hypotheses. Two example applications are given in FIGS. 5A-5D.


Table 2. The numerical values of all slow-wave features showing the effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus. The Appended table contains eight sheets, including (Table 2.1) ‘True values (basic parameters)’, showing the true numerical values of 10 slow-wave features listed with the date and sequence of each experiment; (Table 2.2) ‘True values (DFA & SampEn)’, showing the calculated DFA and SampEn values listed with the date and sequence of each experiment; (Table 2.3) ‘True mean and SD’, showing the calculated means and standard deviations of all slow-wave features grouped by concentration and tissue type; (Table 2.4) ‘Percentage change mean and SD’, showing the calculated means and standard deviations of the percentage change of all slow-wave features grouped by concentration and tissue type; (Table 2.5) ‘p-value’, showing the calculated p-values of all slow-wave features for comparisons between the baseline and post-treatment recordings; (Table 2.6) ‘Pattern(B)’, showing the calculated percentage values of the dominant activation time pattern based on the baseline data and the respective p-value; (Table 2.7) ‘Pattern(P)’, showing the calculated percentage values of the dominant activation time pattern based on the post-treatment data and the respective p-values; and (Table 2.8) ‘Radar’, showing the percentage change values used for plotting the radar diagram in FIG. 4.


Prediction of the potential for a drug to induce nausea was made. The analysis used data extracted from the inventors' database that was generated from the effects of 25 drugs on duodenal tissues (see for example, FIGS. 5A-5D). A literature search was conducted to gather clinical data on the potential of each drug to induce nausea in humans. The 25 drugs were separated into two groups: nausea-inducing and non-nausea-inducing. All slow-wave features were subjected to clustering and machine learning. Principal component analysis was used to extract the major components that explain 95% of the differences between groups. All data were clustered to visualise the potential features used for classification (FIG. 5A). Features with significant differences between the two groups were identified (FIG. 5C). The prediction model can be applied for adverse effect prediction for novel drugs. The current model for nausea prediction has 68.8% accuracy. The performance of the model is expected to improve as more drugs are added to the database. Similar models can also be built for other GI-related adverse effects, such as vomiting, diarrhoea, and constipation, using different sub-sets of data extracted from the database and from current and future literature. The machine learning models are learned models computer-generated and stored in machine-readable codes when machines learn from the data stored in a database. These can be actively updated and improved over time. The drug profile of these other 25 drugs can be used with various embodiments of the subject invention as applied on dopamine to evaluate these and other drugs. Beneficial and effective embodiments are within the scope of the subject invention for most common animal models with a functional gastrointestinal tract or other functional organ or biological system that have pacemaker activities.


Classification of dopamine receptor agonists and antagonists was undertaken. The example analysis used five agonists and five antagonists of dopamine receptors, regardless of their affinity or selectivity for dopamine receptor subtypes. Depending on the hypothesis to be tested, the model can be further refined by testing a list of drugs that act on a specific dopamine receptor subtype(s) (e.g., D2 receptor) or by separating drugs with known low or high affinity towards specific receptors (e.g., with pKi values<7 or >7). The current example identified specific features that were significantly different between dopamine agonists and antagonists (FIGS. 5B and 5D). This model can be used to predict the properties of newly synthesised drugs.


Expression of dopamine receptors in the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus was observed. PCR was performed using specific primers for D1, D2, D3, and D4 dopamine receptors. All four types of receptors were found to be expressed in the stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon of Suncus murinus, with brain tissue used as a reference for expression (Table 1). Based on the partial sequences obtained by RNA sequencing of a young adult male Suncus murinus (data not provided), homology with human D1, D2, and D3 sequences was 89.4%, 93.6%, and 85.1%, respectively. The partial sequence aligned to D4 was not sufficient to accurately determine the level of homology.









TABLE 1







Primer pairs specific for Suncus



murinus dopamine receptors














Forward primers
Reverse primers
size







D1
3′ -TCGCAGTCCAA
3′ -TACCTGATCCC
122




AATGACCGA-5′
CCATTCCGT-5′
bp




(SEQ ID NO: 1)
(SEQ ID NO: 2)
















TCGCAGTCCAAAATGACCGAGAGCGCTGGCGACAGT




TTCTCCGAGGGCTTGGCCCCTCCCCCACCCACCTCC




TCCTTCTTCTTCACATCTTCAGAGGAGCCCACGGAA




TGGGGGATCAGGTA (SEQ ID NO: 3)
















D2
3′ -CCATTGGGCAA
3′ -GGAGCTGGAGA
216




GGTCTGGAT-5′
TGGAGATGC-5′
bp




(SEQ ID NO: 4)
(SEQ ID NO: 5)
















CCATTGGGCAAGGTCTGGATCTCAAAGAACTTGGCA




ATCCTGGAGTGGTCTCTGGCATGCCCATTCTTCTCT




GGTTTGGCGGGGCTATCAGGGGTGCTGTGGAGGCCA




TGTTGAGATGGGTCAGGGAGGGTCAGCTGGTGGTGG




CTGGGTGGAATGGGACTGTAGCGGGTCCTCTCAGGC




GGGCTGGTGCTGGACAGCATCTCCATCTCCAGCTCC




(SEQ ID NO: 6)
















D3
3′ -AAAAGGGCAG
3′ -GGTTGCCTTCT
156




GAAGGACTCG-5′
TCTCCCGAA-5′
bp




(SEQ ID NO: 7)
(SEQ ID NO: 8)
















AAAAGGGCAGGAAGGACTCGAAACTCTCTCAGCCCC




AACTTGGCACCCAAGCTCAGCTTAGAAGTTCGAAAA




CTCAGTAACGGCAGGCTGTCAACATCCCTAAAGTTG




GGTCCACTGCAACCTAGATCAGTGCCACTTCGGGAG




AAGAAGGCAACC (SEQ ID NO: 9)
















D4
3′ -ACAGGCCTCTC
3′ -TCTGGGCCTGG
169




AGTGTCTCA-5′
TTCTACTGT-5′
bp




(SEQ ID NO: 10)
(SEQ ID NO: 11)
















ACAGGCCTCTCAGTGTCTCAGCACAGACAGACAGAC




AGACGTGCCTGCATCTGTCTTGTTCTCGCCCCACAC




CCGAGTCCCCCTGCCAGACGTCCCCTGCAACACTAC




CAGCCAAGGAGTTACTGCTGCTCGGGTGGCTGGAAC




CCACGACAGTAGAACCAGGCCCAGA




(SEQ ID NO: 12)







bp: base pairs. Partial sequences of the genes are shown.






Using dopamine as an example drug, the inventors demonstrated that pacemaker activity in the GI tract of Suncus murinus can be recorded using an MEA technique and that slow-wave features can be extracted using known analytical algorithms and a novel phase-based pattern distribution analysis. Moreover, the inventors showed that the collection of these slow-wave features can be used to build a drug database for drug screening and classification, and the development of predictive learning models, including but not limited to the prediction and interpretation of functional effects, drug adverse effects, and the classification of drug actions on specific receptors.


An exemplary business model was defined, wherein the standardised protocol from data collection to data analysis and the construction of a basic database in accordance with an embodiment of the subject invention, standardising the experimental process and constructing the automatic analytical pipeline to build databases for predictive and classification purposes to potentially generate revenue. Certain aims of the business model can include but are not limited to (1) helping clients test their target drugs using a standardised protocol; (2) to record, evaluate, analyse, interpret, and build similar databases to generate revenue; and (3) to regulate the use of the built databases under this standardised protocol for drug comparisons or model construction to generate revenue. The standardised protocol, including the experimental methodology and automatic analytical pipeline, is valuable in terms of its efficiency, accuracy, and reproducibility to decrease the number of human errors and reduce bias in data collection, analysis, and slow-wave feature extraction. Moreover, the database provides data consistency, reliability, and comprehensiveness for each drug tested. The predictive power of the database can be useful in aspects including, but not limited to, drug discovery and development, food safety, basic research, and the development of personalised therapy.


Flexibility of the standardised protocol includes but is not limited to animal models. The standardised protocol for pacemaker potential recording and analysis is not limited to applications using Suncus murinus. The protocol can also be applied to studies of mice [4, 11,12, 17-21], guinea pigs [22], rats (FIG. 10), and ferrets (FIGS. 9A-9F), and any species with a functional GI system, including humans.


Moreover, the current example study only shows the use of the technique in healthy animal subjects. However, the technique can also be used in disease, transgenic, or pre-treatment animal models, such as those developed to investigate inflammation, diabetes, chemotherapy, or neurodegeneration, to study different types of hypotheses.


Other tissue models are contemplated under various embodiments of the subject invention. The current example model-built drug database focused on the GI tract. However, similar models can be built using tissues other than those from the GI tract, including for example, cardiac, neuronal, and muscular tissue, to construct new databases for the prediction of other adverse effects, including for example, cardiac dysrhythmia and epilepsy in accordance with the teachings of the subject invention.


The current example used microelectrode array chips designed and produced by Ayanda Biosystems (S.A. Lausanne, Switzerland). The chips had 60 electrodes, with an inter-electrode distance of 200 μm, an electrode diameter of 30 μm, and an electrode height of 30 μm. The MEA system used in this study was designed and produced by Multichannel Systems (Reutlingen, Germany). The number of electrodes, the inter-electrode distance, and the diameter and height of the electrodes can be customised to record a larger area or a different resolution for similar drug testing purposes and database construction in accordance with the teachings of the subject invention.


The inventors extracted more than 24 slow-wave features that were then stored in the inventors' database, based on existing algorithms including fast Fourier transform, Hilbert transform, and continuous wavelet transform algorithms; DFA; and SampEn analysis. These features can be refined to suit different purposes and applications and to build different predictive models. Moreover, with further mathematical and technological advancements, other types of slow-wave features can be extracted to include in the database.


The application of the drug databases are not limited to the embodiments detailed herein. Two example applications, namely, the prediction of the potential of a drug to induce adverse effects and the classification of drug actions on a specific receptor, were given as examples. Other potential applications of the drug database include, but are not limited to, comparisons of synthesised drugs with different chemical formulations; comparisons of different drugs, food products, remedies, and therapies; comparisons of different animals, diseases, and transgenic and pre-treatment models; comparisons of mathematical models; and combinations of the aforementioned applications.


The animals were euthanised by carbon dioxide asphyxiation. Cervical dislocation was not performed due to ethical issues. An overdose of anaesthesia or other methods that would require the use of a chemical compound for euthanasia were avoided to minimise the effects of these compounds on pacemaker activity prior to the experiments. For example, sodium pentobarbital is known to alter GI motility [23].


Faecal content within the lumen of the GI was washed away using Krebs' medium. The cells were not digested or isolated and the mucosal layer was not removed. The full thickness of the GI tissues was used for recordings. The advantage of this method is that the ICCs remain intact to preserve the majority of their natural connections with other cells, including enteric neurons and smooth muscle cells, for the aim of drug screening. Moreover, this method had a greater success rate than previously published methods at producing high-quality pacemaker signals [17-21, 24, 25].


The use of the MEA over other techniques to record GI pacemaker activity has certain advantages in certain embodiments but is not necessarily limiting to all embodiments. The MEA technique is superior to conventional single microelectrode or patch-clamping techniques [26,27], because it allows the deduction of spatial and two-dimensional wave propagation information. The MEA technique allows recordings over a larger area, covering a network of ICCs, and is superior to calcium imaging techniques [28], in which only a few ICC cells can be examined at a time and that are limited by the power of the microscope and camera. For example, within the area (1.8 mm2) covered by 60 electrodes in the current protocol, there are >900 ICC cell bodies and numerous ICC fibres [4]. However, in contrast to single microelectrode, patch-clamping, and calcium imaging techniques, where currents within a single ICC can be recorded, the MEA records extracellularly over a network of ICCs. The exact currents of the slow waves produced by a single ICC cannot be measured by the MEA. For drug testing, the evaluation of networking behavior using an MEA is considered to be a more appropriate technique.


Certain methods were employed to minimise signal contamination. The signals recorded can include those from local electrically active cells other than the ICCs, including smooth muscle cells and neurons. The inventors aimed to preserve most or all of these potential targets to determine the final drug-induced effect on pacemaker activity. However, the inventors found that it was essential to keep the GI tissue static for stable and reliable recordings. The inventors added nifedipine (1 μM) to block smooth muscle activity and movement by blocking L-type calcium channels [22], to inhibit the tissue from moving away from the recording area due to smooth muscle contraction and relaxation. The inventors did not block high-frequency neuronal spiking activity by pharmacological means. Instead, the inventors performed filtering to remove high-frequency spikes during data analysis. This condition preserves most neuronal interactions that occur via neurotransmitters and receptors, and most ion channels. However, special attention is required when designing experiments on drugs that act on calcium or potassium ion channels, which are potentially blocked by nifedipine [4]. This is believed to be the optimal condition for the study of drug interactions with pacemaker potentials in isolated GI tissues under the current technical limitations.


Embodiments can provide advantageous sampling frequency and data filtering methods. According to the Nyquist sampling theorem, the sampling frequency should be at least two times the highest frequency of the signal of interest to enable the correct re-construction of the original signals. The pacemaker frequency the inventors recorded in different animal models, or after the administration of different drugs, never exceeded 50 cpm, i.e., 0.83 Hz. Therefore, theoretically, a sampling rate of 2 Hz is sufficient to determine the pacemaker frequency. However, within a waveform, minor fluctuations can be important features induced by drugs, because they can be controlled by a series of different ion channels [29,30]. These fluctuation features were analysed using DFA and SampEn analysis.


In certain embodiments, the lowest possible pacemaker frequency is 0 cpm and the highest possible pacemaker frequency is <50 cpm. The inventors set the stopband filter between 0.01 and 2 Hz, i.e., 0.6 to 120 cpm, which is sufficient to cover most or all possible pacemaker frequencies. Very low frequency contamination (<2 cpm), hypothetically coming from the environment, sometimes appears; therefore, 2 cpm was set as the lower cut-off frequency in the power spectrum analysis. The normal intestinal pacemaker frequency is approximately 20-30 cpm. The second periodic frequency peak in the power spectrum can have significant power in some intestinal recordings. To avoid including the peaks of the resonance frequencies, the inventors set the upper cut-off frequency at 40 cpm, which is sufficient to include most pacemaker frequencies and is very likely below the second periodic peak frequency. The cut-off filters can be changed accordingly to suit different target animal models or even human tissues.


Moreover, some channels can often appear to record artefacts, noise, or contaminating signals, due to various reasons, including air bubbles or dirt on the surface of the electrode; a partially broken electrode; poor contact between the tissue and the electrodes and between the electrodes and the system; and poor experimental technique, that can result in tissue damage. Some of these problems can be resolved by regularly replacing the MEA chips. However, channel filtering is essential to allow the removal of these artefacts. Bad channels affect the derivation of the dominant frequency or power spectrum analysis, that use data averaged from most or all 60 channels. The derivation of velocity or propagation pattern analyses is more severely affected by bad channels, which requires the relative derivation of networking behaviors across the 60 channels. Although the data from bad channels can be auto-reconstructed by taking data from the nearby channels, there is a limitation in doing so. Therefore, in some datasets, if the baseline data do not meet the requirements of bad channel filtering, either the entire dataset will be eliminated, or only the frequency or power spectrum data will be included in the database.


Embodiments can provide advantageous systems and methods for data interpretation. Dopamine was used as an example in this study. Previous studies have shown that both dopamine agonists and antagonists inhibit pacemaker activity in isolated ICCs from mouse ilea [31]. This is consistent with the inventors' data on the ileum of Suncus murinus, in which dopamine significantly reduced the DP, amplitude, and slope, while increasing the period of the waveforms. These inhibitory effects were also observed in duodenal segments. In the stomach, the AF, percentage of tachy-rhythms, and signal irregularity were significantly increased by dopamine. In humans, the precursor of dopamine, L-DOPA, can slow down stomach emptying [32], while dopamine antagonists, such as domperidone, facilitate peristalsis and gastric emptying [33]. Apomorphine, a dopamine receptor agonist and an anti-PD drug, is also well known to induce emesis. It has been suggested that dopamine agonists should be administered when the stomach is empty, or even via non-oral routes, for PD treatment [34,35]. These clinical suggestions can be related to the induction of irregular gastric slow waves by dopamine. However, it is important to note that the effects seen in the current study were on isolated gut tissues, which are independent of central reflexes.


Certain findings in colonic tissue were distinct from those in the stomach and proximal intestine. The inventors found that dopamine had a biphasic effect, in which the percentage of tachy-rhythms increased after dopamine administration at 1-10 μM, whereas the percentage of brady-rhythms increased after dopamine administration at 100 μM. These findings can help explain the effects of dopamine in the human colon, where it induces phasic contractions at lower concentrations, but acts as a relaxant at higher concentrations [36]. Due to these biphasic effects, the concentration of dopamine in the colon becomes important when interpreting colon-related adverse effects, such as constipation. It is noteworthy that transdermal dopamine therapy [37] appears to reduce the side effects of oral dopamine therapy at delaying gastric emptying or worsening constipation [10]. This is because the slow release of a low concentration of dopamine can relieve the side effects of high-dose dopamine therapy.


Dopamine also induced significant irregular signal shapes, as determined by the DFA fluctuation function in the stomach and along the gut. This provides further evidence for the role of dopamine in GI motility and the potential reasons for dopamine-induced GI dysrhythmia.


Using the inventors' novel phase-based pattern distribution analysis, the activation time pattern was found to be significantly altered in duodenal and ileal tissues treated with dopamine at 100 nM and 100 μM, but not at intermediate concentrations of 1 μM and 10 μM. This indicates a new type of biphasic effect of dopamine in the upper gut. There are less clinical data related to the duodenum and ileum, but alterations in slow-wave propagation patterns can induce dysrhythmic motility in the upper gut, which can be related to some unexplainable clinical effects, such as abdominal pain and discomfort. In colonic tissues, although the frequency distribution showed a significant biphasic effect, the pattern distribution was relatively stable.


In certain embodiments of the analytical pipeline developed in this study, standardised spectrograms and DFA and SampEn graphs were automatically plotted and saved as images for all datasets. These graphs can be useful in deep learning protocols for more advance feature extraction. Embodiments can provide certain weights for each feature to construct a reference index value, which will be named as the ‘GI Dysrhythmia Index’. This index value can be used to indicate the level of drug-induced GI dysrhythmia, based on pacemaker activity tested using this standardised methodology.


Example 3 Predicting Drug Adverse Effects Using a New Gastro-Intestinal Pacemaker Activity Drug Database (GIPADD)

Background and aims of this example include demonstrating and better understanding embodiments of the subject invention where electrical data a source of big-data for training AI for drug discovery. A Gastro-Intestinal Pacemaker Activity Drug Database was built using a standardized methodology to test drug effects on EF of GI pacemaker activity. The current example used data obtained from 89 drugs with 4,867 datasets to evaluate the potential use of the GIPADD for predicting drug AEs using a ML approach and to explore correlations between AEs and GI pacemaker activity.


Methods included the following. Twenty-four EFs were extracted using an automated analytical pipeline from the electrical signals recorded before and after acute drug treatment at 3 concentrations (or more) on 4-types of GI tissues (stomach, duodenum, ileum and colon). Extracted features were normalized and merged with an online side-effect resource (SIDER) database. Sixty-six common AEs were selected for testing. Different algorithms of classification ML models, including Naïve Bayes, discriminant analysis, classification tree, k-nearest neighbors, support vector machine and an ensemble model were tested. Separated tissue models were also tested. Averaging experimental repeats and dose adjustment were performed to refine the prediction results. Random datasets were created for model validation.


Results included the following. After model validation, 9 AEs classification ML model were constructed with accuracy ranging from 67-80%. EFs can be further grouped into ‘excitatory’ and ‘inhibitory’ types of AEs. This provides a novel approach wherein drugs are clustered based on EFs. Drugs acting on similar receptors can share similar EF profile, indicating advantageous use of the database to predict drug targets.


Conclusions included the following. Embodiments of the subject invention advantageously apply GIPADD, a growing database where prediction accuracy is expected to improve, to develop ML models predicting drug AEs and other factors. Embodiments provide novel insights on how EFs can be used as a new source of big-data in health and disease.


Database construction proceeded as follows. Datasets accumulated in the database were produced using methodologies according to certain embodiments of the subject invention. (See, e.g., Liu J Y H, et al. Use of a microelectrode array to record extracellular pacemaker potentials from the gastrointestinal tracts of the ICR mouse and house musk shrew (Suncus murinus). Cell Calcium 2019; 80. Liu J Y H, et al. Acetylcholine exerts inhibitory and excitatory actions on mouse ileal pacemaker activity: Role of muscarinic versus nicotinic receptors. Am J Physiol—Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2020; 319:G97-107. Liu J Y H, et al. Involvement of TRPV1 and TRPA1 in the modulation of pacemaker potentials in the mouse ileum. Cell Calcium 2021; 97:102417. Liu J Y H, et al. A pipeline for phase-based analysis of in vitro micro-electrode array recordings of gastrointestinal slow waves. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc Annu Int Conf 2021; 2021:261-4. TuL, et al. Insights Into Acute and Delayed Cisplatin-Induced Emesis From a Microelectrode Array, Radiotelemetry and Whole-Body Plethysmography Study of Suncus murinus (House Musk Shrew). Front Pharmacol 2021; 12. Liu J Y H, et al. Regional differences of tachykinin effects on smooth muscle and pacemaker potentials of the stomach, duodenum, ileum and colon of an emetic model, the house musk shrews. Neuropeptides 2022; 97:102300. Each of which, respectively, is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, including all graphs and figures, to the extent such disclosure is not inconsistent with the explicit teachings of this application.)


A total of 24 features, including dominant frequency, average frequency, dominant power, amplitude, period, velocity; percentage of contribution in power spectrum divided into percentages of brady-rhythm, normal-rhythm, and tachy-rhythm; signal stability, and complexity features including multiscale sample entropy and detrended fluctuation analysis divided into various time window scale; and wave propagation features including change in dominant propagation patterns were automatically extracted using customized and automated analytical programs according to an embodiment of the subject invention. Standardized and optimized filters and thresholds settings were included in certain analytical programs to remove datasets that did not meet baseline signal quality requirements.


Learning datasets construction proceeded as follows. All 24 features were normalized into percentage change values (e.g., by [(Xpost-drug−XBaseline)/XBaseline×100%] for data with specific units, and (% Xpost-drug−% XBaseline) for features which were originally presented in percentage of contribution). Normalized features and the drug name, tested dose and tissue-type were further merged with the online side effect resource (SIDER) database (version downloaded in October 2021)[46] based on matched drug names. Sixty-six common AEs were selected for this study. Each respective drug was first marked as ‘1’ indicating a positive correlation with each respective one of the 66 AEs. If the drug was clinically used with an indication for treatment of the listed AEs, a negative correlation ‘0’ was marked regardless of the positive correlation to the AEs. This step was to minimize the potential false reports of AEs due to existing conditions in patients. Otherwise, a negative correlation ‘0’ was marked for all drugs without the listed side effect. A limitation of this step was the potential of missing positive correlations (e.g., a false negative) of drugs that are seldom used, or have limited entries by virtue of being newly-launched into the market. Imbalanced datasets were identified using a ratio calculated using the following formula:







Balance


Ratio

=


Number


of


positive


correlated


drugs


Total


number


of


drugs






The acceptable range of dataset balance ratios for this study was set to 0.25-0.75. Balance ratios of <0.25 or >0.75 were considered as imbalanced datasets in the current study, and such datasets were not included in any statistical analysis in model comparisons. It is contemplated within the scope of the subject invention that certain embodiments will reach closer to a ratio of 0.5, or closer to another ratio or range of ratios (e.g., 0.26<balance ratio<0.74; 0.3<balance ratio<0.7; 0.4<balance ratio<0.6; 0.45<balance ratio<0.55; 0.48<balance ratio<0.53; 0.49<balance ratio<0.51; including ranges, divisions, and combinations thereof) with more datasets added into the database. Certain embodiments can advantageously provide a range of 0.4<balance ratio>0.6, and this target ratio range can be applied when more drugs are added into the database. This initial study was designed for a proof of concept for the application of the database, and therefore advantageously applied the more inclusive balance ratio range of 0.25-0.75. Features refinement proceeded as follows. Useful features were selected based on binary division of positive and negative datasets with significant differences on the mean of the two groups with p-value (p<0.05) using student's t-test. Selected features were then used for training ML models. Two types of learning datasets were built: (i) 164 average datasets through averaging data obtained from the same drug and same dose, aligning 24×4=96 features obtained from 4-types of tissue tested; (ii) 4,869 single datasets containing 3-10 experimental repeating datasets testing the 89 drugs, >3 doses and 4 types of GI tissue in different experiment preparations.


Machine learning models development proceeded as follows. Several ML models were built and compared: (a) models learnt by the 164 average datasets in (i), (b) models learnt by full 4,869 datasets in (ii), (c) models learnt by datasets in (ii) separated into tissue-type: stomach, duodenum, ileum and colon before training. Three types of classification algorithms were used for (b): naïve Bayes, classification tree and k-nearest neighbor (KNN) and 5 types of classification algorithms were used for (a) and (c): naïve Bayes, classification tree and KNN, discriminant analysis and support vector machine (SVM). Discriminant analysis and SVM were not applied in (b) because the dataset contains empty features which are not readily handled by these algorithms. An additional ensemble model was built through averaging prediction results obtained by either the 3 models or 5 models, respectively. Datasets were randomly separated into half for training and another half for testing. Randomization and training were repeated for seven iterations and results were evaluated to identify the best model. A random dataset of the same sample size was generated based on normal distribution using mean and sample standard deviation of each feature. Models generated using the random dataset were then compared with models generated using the actual dataset. This step validated potential biased prediction accuracy using imbalanced datasets with overfitting problems. Models which did not pass the validation test were discarded.


Prediction results refinement proceeded as follows. Repeated experimental datasets of the same drug and same dose in the prediction results of (b) and (c) were averaged and value>0.5 was listed as a positive prediction result ‘1’, otherwise as a negative prediction ‘0’. Dose weight adjustment was also performed based on the assumption that higher dose can induce more severe AEs. Prediction results were adjusted by an approximately 2-fold weight: 1, 0.5, 0.3, 0.1 and 0.05 in descending order of dose tested (in most cases these were separated by 10-fold). Dose weight adjustment in this study is a preliminary proof of concept to test whether the tested doses of drugs can contribute to final prediction result to improve prediction accuracy, and this study describes a simple method on how it can be incorporated into the ML models to adjust final prediction results. Values of weights can be adjusted using methods including but not limited to feedback Neural Network when more data is available for training in the future. Prediction accuracy was compared between prediction results with or without the above averaging and adjustment to show if these procedures can improve predictions. The flow of steps for selecting high performing ML models for selected AEs is summarized in FIGS. 13A and 13B.


Example applications of selected ML models proceeded as follows. The selected models were tested for the application to generate an adverse effect prediction report for several selected drugs. Selected models included 5 properties: the selected AEs for prediction, selected dataset type (a), (b) or (c) for training, algorithm-used, tissue-type, and presence or absence of prediction refinement procedures. Seven randomized predictions were performed to create correlated probability presented in percentage of chance that a certain drug can induce the tested AEs. The AE prediction results were compared with the SIDER database. Another 3 drugs which were not included in training ML model due to lack of matching drugs in SIDER were also applied for testing. Models with imbalanced datasets, or those that failed to pass the validation test using random datasets, were not included in the final sets of AEs prediction output. Re-construction and re-training of failed models in this study is contemplated within the scope of the subject invention as the database grow larger or as additional data becomes available.


Data analysis proceeded as follows. Statistical analysis comparing different ML models was performed using PRISM 8.0 software (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA). Machine learning was performed using MATLAB 2020b The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA). All numerical data are expressed as mean±standard deviation and p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Network cluster graph was plotted using a custom program written in R version 4.2.2.


Model comparison with different pre-training and post-training refinement procedures proceeded as follows. A total of 89 drugs were matched with the SIDER database, and the ratio of positive-correlated datasets over total number of datasets for 66 selected common AEs were calculated and listed in Table 3, which shows a list of selected adverse effects (AEs) analyzed according to an embodiment of the subject invention. AEs with data ratio [number of positive-correlated datasets/total number of datasets] of between 0.25-0.75 were considered acceptable for this example and were selected for further model comparison studies which refined 14 selected AEs. Within the 14 AEs, the average prediction accuracy was compared between different models: (A) 164 average datasets averaging experimental repeats before training (B) 4,869 single datasets, (C) 4,869 single datasets separated into tissue-type before training (FIG. 14A). Model B showed the best accuracy 67.1±6.6% (n=14) regardless of training algorithm and tissue-type. Model A only showed a 58.0±4.7% accuracy and model C showed 65.7±6.4% accuracy (n=14). This result shows that pre-averaging experimental repeated datasets or pre-separating tissue-type before ML had generally reduced the final prediction accuracy. Between Model B and C, the difference is whether or not to isolate single tissue-type in training, and including all tissues in B improved accuracy only approximately 2%. It is contemplated within the scope of the subject invention that these pre-training procedures can be effective and advantageous for predicting certain tissue-specific AEs.









TABLE 3







Adverse Events













Colon
Duodenum
Ileum
Stomach
All






















Adverse effects
−ve
+ve
ratio
−ve
+ve
ratio
−ve
+ve
ratio
−ve
+ve
ratio
−ve
+ve
ratio

























Abdominal cramps
1357
184
0.12
1284
171
0.12
1293
182
0.12
343
53
0.13 0
4277
590
0.12


Abdominal discomfort
1430
111
0.07
1339
116
0.08
1362
113
0.08
350
46
0.12
4481
386
0.08


Abdominal distension
1326
215
0.14
1254
201
0.14
1261
214
0.15
343
53
0.13
4184
683
0.14


Abdominal pain
1029
512
0.33
963
492
0.34
969
506
0.34
268
128
0.32
3229
1638
0.34


Agitation
1352
189
0.12
1274
181
0.12
1288
187
0.13
352
44
0.11
4266
601
0.12


Amnesia
1436
105
0.07
1359
96
0.07
1382
93
0.06
352
44
0.11
4529
338
0.07


Angina pectoris
1403
138
0.09
1319
136
0.09
1341
134
0.09
355
41
0.10
4418
449
0.09


Anxiety
1148
393
0.26
1095
360
0.25
1109
366
0.25
264
132
0.33
3616
1251
0.26


Arrhythmia
1107
434
0.28
1028
427
0.29
1056
419
0.28
266
130
0.33
3457
1410
0.29


Back pain
1337
204
0.13
1267
188
0.13
1282
193
0.13
333
63
0.16
4219
648
0.13


Blood pressure
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


abnormal

















Blood pressure
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


fluctuation

















Bradycardia
1217
324
0.21
1146
309
0.21
1163
312
0.21
298
98
0.25
3824
1043
0.21


Cardiac failure
1449
92
0.06
1365
90
0.06
1381
94
0.06
379
17
0.04
4574
293
0.06


Constipation
1120
421
0.27
1049
406
0.28
1056
419
0.28
288
108
0.27
3513
1354
0.28


Cough
1366
175
0.11
1292
163
0.11
1306
169
0.11
356
40
0.10
4320
547
0.11


Decreased appetite
1191
350
0.23
1138
317
0.22
1146
329
0.22
278
118
0.30
3753
1114
0.23


Depression
1406
135
0.09
1331
124
0.09
1340
135
0.09
364
32
0.08
4441
426
0.09


Diarrhoea
968
573
0.37
903
552
0.38
922
553
0.37
231
165
0.42
3024
1843
0.38


Dizziness
969
572
0.37
911
544
0.37
917
558
0.38
263
133
0.34
3060
1807
0.37


Dry eye
1472
69
0.04
1388
67
0.05
1405
70
0.05
376
20
0.05
4641
226
0.05


Dry mouth
1221
320
0.21
1167
288
0.20
1171
304
0.21
317
79
0.20
3876
991
0.20


Dysgeusia
1358
183
0.12
1279
176
0.12
1294
181
0.12
345
51
0.13
4276
591
0.12


Dyspepsia
1188
353
0.23
1145
310
0.21
1133
342
0.23
304
92
0.23
3770
1097
0.23


Dysphagia
1321
220
0.14
1234
221
0.15
1247
228
0.15
330
66
0.17
4132
735
0.15


Flushing
1312
229
0.15
1245
210
0.14
1260
215
0.15
333
63
0.16
4150
717
0.15


Gastritis
1365
176
0.11
1309
146
0.10
1309
166
0.11
338
58
0.15
4321
546
0.11


Gastrointestinal
1142
399
0.26
1088
367
0.25
1097
378
0.26
290
106
0.27
3617
1250
0.26


disorder

















Gastrointestinal pain
1122
419
0.27
1043
412
0.28
1048
427
0.29
295
101
0.26
3508
1359
0.28


Gastrooesophageal
1459
82
0.05
1380
75
0.05
1400
75
0.05
372
24
0.06
4611
256
0.05


reflux

















Headache
1155
386
0.25
1092
363
0.25
1104
371
0.25
305
91
0.23
3656
1211
0.25


Heart rate abnormal
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Heart rate irregular
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Hypersensitivity
1093
448
0.29
1044
411
0.28
1049
426
0.29
270
126
0.32
3456
1411
0.29


Hypertension
1171
370
0.24
1114
341
0.23
1123
352
0.24
304
92
0.23
3712
1155
0.24


Hypotension
1300
24
0.16
1221
234
0.16
1247
228
0.15
347
49
0.12
4115
752
0.15


Hypothermia
1496
45
0.03
1410
45
0.03
1430
45
0.03
390
6
0.02
4726
141
0.03


Increased urination
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Insomnia
1286
255
0.17
1208
247
0.17
1227
248
0.17
338
58
0.15
4059
808
0.17


Irritability
1442
99
0.06
1352
103
0.07
1373
102
0.07
376
20
0.05
4543
324
0.07


Menstrual disorder
1454
87
0.06
1365
90
0.06
1386
89
0.06
373
23
0.06
4578
289
0.06


Menstruation delayed
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Menstruation irregular
1449
92
0.06
1355
100
0.07
1381
94
0.06
371
25
0.06
4556
311
0.06


Motor restlessness
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Muscle spasms
1301
240
0.16
1237
218
0.15
1253
222
0.15
307
89
0.22
4098
769
0.16


Nasopharyngitis
1450
91
0.06
1362
93
0.06
1382
93
0.06
380
16
0.04
4574
293
0.06


Nausea
876
665
0.43
822
633
0.44
833
642
0.44
213
183
0.46
2744
2123
0.44


Nervousness
1399
142
0.09
1314
141
0.10
1334
141
0.10
361
35
0.09
4408
459
0.09


Oedema
1263
278
0.18
1200
255
0.18
1221
254
0.17
301
95
0.24
3985
882
0.18


Palpitations
1255
286
0.19
1175
280
0.19
1193
282
0.19
329
67
0.17
3952
915
0.19


Pregnancy
1424
117
0.08
1328
127
0.09
1358
117
0.08
374
22
0.06
4484
383
0.08


Rash
1067
474
0.31
1016
439
0.30
1021
454
0.31
257
139
0.35
3361
1506
0.31


Renal impairment
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Respiration abnormal
1527
14
0.01
1441
14
0.01
1463
12
0.01
392
4
0.01
4823
44
0.01


Retching
1478
63
0.04
1394
61
0.04
1412
63
0.04
372
24
0.06
4656
211
0.04


Sexual dysfunction
1507
34
0.02
1427
28
0.02
1441
34
0.02
385
11
0.03
4760
107
0.02


Somnolence
1284
257
0.17
1205
250
0.17
1217
258
0.17
350
46
0.12
4056
811
0.17


Sweating
1260
281
0.18
1186
269
0.18
1200
275
0.19
311
85
0.21
3957
910
0.19


Swelling
1397
144
0.09
1318
137
0.09
1340
135
0.09
357
39
0.10
4412
455
0.09


Tachycardia
1028
513
0.33
976
479
0.33
996
479
0.32
256
140
0.35
3256
1611
0.33


Temperature
1517
24
0.02
1433
22
0.02
1449
26
0.02
387
9
0.02
4786
81
0.02


intolerance

















Upset stomach
1497
44
0.03
1410
45
0.03
1430
45
0.03
379
17
0.04
4716
151
0.03


Urinary incontinence
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Urination impaired
1496
45
0.03
1410
45
0.03
1430
45
0.03
390
6
0.02
4726
141
0.03


Vision blurred
1541
0
0.00
1455
0
0.00
1475
0
0.00
396
0
0.00
4867
0
0.00


Vomiting
878
663
0.43
817
638
0.44
827
648
0.44
206
190
0.48
2728
2139
0.44









Based on Model B, the average prediction accuracy and best prediction accuracy was compared between models built using actual datasets and random datasets for the 14 AEs. In 3 out of 14 AEs' this test failed to identify significant features for model building using random datasets. In 6 out of 11 AEs this test produced >0.5% better accuracy using actual datasets compared with random datasets in either average or best prediction accuracy (Table-4). Pre-averaging training models that contain only 164 datasets suffered from limited model size between training and testing during randomization. Only models with >80% total drugs after randomization were considered in model accuracy comparison. The prediction accuracy of the final 9 selected models was 67.4-79.8%, true positive rate 62-100% and true negative rate 65-83% (Table-5). These 9 AEs ML models predict anxiety (accuracy: 79.8%), gastrointestinal disorder (79.0%), constipation (76.4%), gastrointestinal pain (75.9%), arrhythmia (74.2%), vomiting (74.1%), dizziness (70.4%), rash (70.1%) and diarrhea (69.7%). In which, anxiety is related to psychology, arrhythmia is cardiology and rash is immunology, while the rest are GI-related AEs. Arrhythmia is easy to relate, because cardiac pacemaking activity shares very similar pacemaking mechanisms with the GI [47]. For psychology-related AEs, while not being bound by theory, the inventors hypothesize this could be due to the shared receptor expression between the brain and the gut, as well as other parts of our body. For example, serotonin controls emotions and serotonin receptors are also important drug target receptors for anti-emetic therapies [12,13]. Rash is an immunity-related AEs, where GI contributed to 70% of our body immunity expressing many types of pre-active immune cells ready to fight against toxic substances and pathogens invasion from ingested materials [50].


Table-4 Comparison between models built using actual datasets and random datasets. Table shows the average accuracy (left columns) and the best accuracy (right column) of all models created with different algorithm-type, tissue-type and with seven randomized training.


(Note at #1 No significant features were identified from the randomized datasets for model building, therefore, no prediction accuracy data were available.)















TABLE 4






Average
Average

Best
Best




accuracy
accuracy

accuracy
accuracy




(Actual
(Random

(Actual
(Random



Adverse effects
datasets)
datasets)
Difference
datasets)
datasets)
Difference





















Abdominal pain
65.5
65.3
0.2
68.5
68.5
0.0


Anxiety
74.1
72.9
1.3
77.5
75.3
2.2


Arrhythmia
70.5
68.6
1.9
74.2
71.9
2.2


Constipation
72.1
#1

76.4




Diarrhoea
62.1
62.0
0.1
69.7
66.3
3.4


Dizziness
59.7


67.4




Gastrointestinal disorder
72.7


78.1




Gastrointestinal pain
71.4
71.0
0.3
74.6
73.0
1.5


Headache
75.9
76.0
−0.1
78.7
79.0
−0.4


Hypersensitivity
68.4
68.3
0.1
71.9
71.9
0.0


Nausea
56.6
56.8
−0.2
61.4
62.9
−1.6


Rash
65.4
64.7
0.7
69.1
69.2
−0.1


Tachycardia
67.1
66.9
0.2
70.5
70.8
−0.3


Vomiting
56.4
57.0
−0.6
68.2
66.3
1.9









Table-5 Table showing the final selected useful ML model for predicting 9 AEs, and the properties of the selected models. TPR: true positive rate; TNR: true negative rate; FPR: false positive rate; FNR: false negative rate; TP: true positive count; TN: true negative count; FP: false positive count; FN: false negative count.

    • #1 A: 164 average datasets through averaging data obtained from the same drug and same dose, aligning 24×4=96 features obtained from 4-type of tissue tested; B: 4,869 single datasets with experimental repeated datasets testing the same drug, same dose and same tissue in different preparation for 3-10 times. C: 4,869 single datasets with repeating datasets and trained separately for different tissue-type.
    • #2 Prediction adjustment 1: Combine and average the prediction results of repeated datasets of the same treatment. Y: Yes; N: No.
    • #3 Prediction adjustment 2: Dose weight adjustment based on simple hypothesis that higher dose had higher chance in side effects induction by 1, 0.5, 0.3, 0.1, 0.05, currently no drugs are tested for more than 5 doses. Y: Yes; N: No.
    • #4 Representative tissue for classification: s: stomach; d: duodenum; i: ileum; c: colon; a: all.















TABLE 5










Model
Average
Dose
Ratio of


Adverse effects
Accuracy
Algorithm
Type#1
Repeats #2
Adjust #3
testing data





Anxiety
79.8
KNN
B
Y
N
0.75


Arrhythmia
74.2
Bayes
B
Y
Y
0.29


Constipation
76.4
Tree
B
Y
Y
0.27


Diarrhoea
69.7
Tree
B
Y
Y
0.36


Dizziness
70.4
Bayes
A
N
N
0.63



67.4
Ensemble
B
Y
Y
0.39


Gastrointestinal
79.0
Bayes
C
Y
N
0.26


disorder








Gastrointestinal
75.9
KNN
C
Y
N
0.29


pain








Rash
70.1
Tree
C
Y
Y
0.34


Vomiting
74.1
Bayes
A
Y
Y
0.69



71.0
Tree
C
Y
N
0.44



















Adverse effects
Tissue #4
TPR
TNR
FPR
FNR
TP
TN
FP
FN





Anxiety
c
100
79
21
0
4
67
18
0


Arrhythmia
a
71
74
26
29
5
61
21
2


Constipation
c
76
80
24
20
20
4
64
20


Diarrhoea
a
62
72
28
38
13
49
19
8


Dizziness
a
71
67
33
29
45
12
6
18



a
100
65
35
0
6
54
29
0


Gastrointestinal
s
100
78
22
0
3
46
13
0


disorder











Gastrointestinal
d
100
75
25
0
4
62
21
0


pain











Rash
d
75
70
30
25
6
55
24
2


Vomiting
a
73
83
17
27
55
5
1
20



S
74
70
30
26
14
30
13
5









Based on these 9 AEs and Model B, ML models were further compared across tissue-type (FIG. 14B) and algorithm-type (FIG. 14C). Comparisons included the refinement procedures of prediction results through averaging experimental repeated datasets and dose-weight adjustment. The result shows that the procedure of dose-weight adjustment generally did not improve the accuracy of predictions in all tested models, but rather slightly reduced the accuracy with range between 0.01-0.43%. Without being bound by theory, the inventors hypothesize that the effect of dose weight adjustment can be improved with further investigation to optimize the weight values, which can be tested and proven to show advantageous effects (e.g., with larger database.) Across different tissue models, averaging repeated datasets significantly improved the average prediction accuracy for all types of tissue models by 1.8-2.2% (p<0.001, n=294-1,428). This improvement is expected, as more experimental repeats should help improving data accuracy, provided that there is a correlation between EFs and tested AEs. Across different classification algorithms, averaging repeated datasets significantly improved the accuracy only in KNN (+5.55%, p<0.001, n=238), classification tree (+5.45%, p<0.001, n=238), Naïve Bayes (+1.98%, p<0.001, n=238). However, this refinement procedure did not improve the prediction accuracy in an ensemble model (+0.11%, insignificant, n=238), discriminant analysis (−0.08%, p<0.01, n=238) and SVM model (−0.29%, p<0.001, n=238). Among all tissue models, the ileum had the best accuracy at 67.4±6.9%, compared to the stomach at 65.1±7.6%. Across different classification algorithms, the best algorithm is discriminant analysis (67.6±6.7%) and SVM (67.8±6.8%) before merging experimental repeats, while KNN model showed the lowest accuracy (65.1±7.4%) after merging experimental repeats. Note that the above model comparison only represents the general trend. Specific refinement procedures were sometimes found useful in improving accuracy for predicting certain AEs.


Feature selection and comparison proceeded as follows. Binary division between negative and positive AEs correlated datasets was used to select and refine features for training the ML model. Although ML models have not yet been successfully built for all 66 selected AEs (while note being bound by theory, the inventors hypothesize this is due to an observed significant imbalance in available datasets, and it is therefore within the scope of the subject invention with increased availability of data and development or recognition of new datasets, embodiments can provide new, better, and more reliable ML models for additional AEs), the feature selection process can identify correlated patterns of change in EFs of GI pacemaker activity for different groups of AEs. The identified significant features could be important factors to correlate GI pacemaker activities to health and disease. The correlated patterns can be divided into two major groups of AEs, ‘excitatory’ and ‘inhibitory’ AEs (Table-6, FIGS. 15A-15L). AE-inducing drugs in ‘excitatory’ AEs group (19 selected AEs) had more excitatory actions on the colon, which increased average frequency, further increased tachy-rhythm power and dominant power of the colon tissues, and also further reduced dominant power of stomach tissues compare to non-AE-inducing drugs. On the other hand, AE-inducing drugs in ‘inhibitory’ AEs group (7 selected AEs) had opposite effects which did not increase average frequency, tachy-rhythm power and dominant power on the colon tissues. However, the AE-inducing drugs in the 7 ‘inhibitory’ AEs shared common inhibitory effects on the duodenal tissues to further reduce the slope and amplitude, while increasing the period of waveform compared to non-AE-inducing drugs, where these changes were not identified in the ‘excitatory’ AEs. This phenomenon indicated that common patterns of change in GI pacemaker activity can be found in correlated sets of AEs. These patterns of change can be correlated to common receptor activation or inhibition to generally excite and inhibit GI pacemaker activity at different GI segments.









TABLE 6







List of “excitatory” AEs and “inhibitory” AEs sharing


similar change of pattern based on EF drug profile.










“Excitatory” AEs
“Inhibitory” AEs







Common actions:
Common actions:



excitatory actions on the colon,
inhibitory effects on



reduced dominant power of the stomach
the duodenum



Dyspepsia
Cough



Dizziness
Headache



Rash
Insomnia



Vomiting
Hypothermia



Gastrointestinal pain
Angina pectoris



Tachycardia
Irritability



Diarrhoea
Palpitations



Gastrointestinal disorder



Abdominal pain



Arrhythmia



Dysphagia



Decreased appetite



Gastritis



Abdominal distension



Constipation



Gastroesophageal reflux



Nausea



Abdominal discomfort



Muscle spasms










This study also provides a novel graphical representation on how drugs can be correlated with AE-related EFs. Drugs can be clustered based on refined EFs and plotted into a network graph. An example for constipation network model is shown in FIG. 16A. Two circles (shaded in yellow) show positive-correlation and negative-correlation with constipation, respectively based on the averaged and refined supervised EFs. The larger the distance between these two circles (black arrow), the better the model can distinguish between the constipation-inducing properties of drugs. Ondansetron (blue arrow, labelled with “ond”) and morphine (red arrow, “mor”) are two drugs-in-market that are known to induce constipation as AE. Based on this graph, we can also observe that drugs known to act on similar receptors are clustered together based on EFs (shaded in green), such as prostaglandin E1 (“pge1”) and prostaglandin E2 (“pge2”), or substance P (“sp”) and neurokinin A (“nka”), providing evidences that embodiments including GIPADD can also predict drug targeting receptors.


Other than the ‘excitatory’ and ‘inhibitory’ EF drug profiles, other interesting significant feature differences were identified. In GI-related AEs, drugs inducing abdominal distension and upset stomach had reduced the duodenal dominant pacemaker frequency at a higher level compared to non-AEs inducing drugs; and drugs inducing abdominal cramps did not alter ileum propagating velocity, but non-AE-inducing drugs generally induced it (FIG. 16B). In psychological AEs, drugs that induced anxiety and depression had increased the colon average pacemaker frequency, and further induced stomach average pacemaker frequency compared to non-AEs inducing drugs (FIG. 16C). In blood pressure-related AEs, hypotension-inducing drugs reduced duodenal propagating velocity, but not hypertension-inducing drugs. On the other hand, hypotension-inducing drugs reduced percentage of tachy-rhythm at the ileum, while hypertension-inducing drugs induced it. Hypotension-inducing drugs did not change the ileal propagation velocity, but hypertension-inducing drugs induced it significantly (FIG. 16D). Although these AE-to-EF correlations can be weak or in certain cases, very weak, these can improve brainstorming of novel connections and hypothesis beyond unaided human efforts. These correlations are advantageously generated based on computer calculations without the inherent bias in human-driven hypothesis.


Drug report generation proceeded as follows. The 9 selected ML models were applied for making predictions. Four drugs, apomorphine, atorvastatin, oxytocin, and amlodipine, were used for the trained models in AE prediction (Table-7). Models accurately predicted positive correlations in gastrointestinal disorder and gastrointestinal pain for amlodipine and negative correlations for apomorphine and atorvastatin. Models also predicted positive correlations in vomiting for apomorphine, constipation for amlodipine, rash for oxytocin. However, positive correlations in anxiety, arrhythmia, diarrhea and dizziness were not correctly identified for these selected drugs. In addition, another three drugs, neurokinin A (NKA), peptide YY and lipopolysaccharide (LPS), which were not used in training models due to missing side effect profile in SIDER were also tested, in which potential vomiting-inducing properties were predicted for NKA and peptide YY with 43% randomized prediction results showing positive correlations, while LPS showed very minor positive correlations with rash (14%) and constipation (14%).


Table-7. Example drug AE prediction report. A table showing the prediction results of 9 selected AEs for 4 selected drugs used in model training compared with AEs occurrence listed in SIDER, where ‘0’ indicates negative correlations and ‘1’ indicates positive correlations (left column), and the prediction results of another 3 drugs which was not included in SIDER and model training (right column).


















TABLE 7
















Drugs not included











in training models











Adverse
Drugs used in training models

Peptide















effects
Apomorphine
Atorvastatin
Oxytocin
Amlodipine
NKA
YY
LPS





















Anxiety
 0%
1
 0%
0
 0%
0
  0%
1
 0%
 0%
 0%


Arrhythmia
 0%
0
 0%
0
 0%
1
  0%
1
 0%
 0%
 0%


Constipation
29%
1
 0%
0
 0%
0
 57%
1
 0%
 0%
14%


Diarrhea
 0%
1
 0%
0
 0%
0
 0%
1
 0%
 0%
 0%


Dizziness
 0%
1
14%
0
 0%
0
 0%
1
 0%
 0%
 0%


Gastrointestinal
 0%
0
 0%
0
 0%
1
100%
1
 0%
 0%
 0%


disorder













Gastrointestinal
 0%
0
 0%
0
 0%
0
100%
1
 0%
 0%
 0%


pain













Rash
 0%
0
 0%
0
71%
1
 0%
1
 0%
 0%
14%


Vomiting
71%
1
 0%
0
 0%
1
 0%
1
43%
43%
 0%









Conclusions are summarized as follows. This example describes a selection process and prediction refinement procedures for creating the best classification ML model to predict selected AEs for drugs using the GIPADD database integrating with the SIDER database. This example also emphasizes the advantages of using standardized drug screening methodology to create EF drug databases, allowing highly-consistent and massive amount of comparisons to be performed between numerous of drugs simultaneously, which could quickly advance the unexplored knowledge on drug-induced effects on EF of GI pacemaker activity, or even discover novel correlations which we had never considered before. Using our established standardized drug testing methodology with the MEA technology [1-6] and automated data analytical pipeline [4], any novel EF drug profile and AE prediction result can be created in two to three days. This is expected to bring game-changing impact towards decision making in drug discovery.


Addition of one new drug profile into the database allows thousands of new comparative calculations. Within the cutoff-database used in this example, there were >6 billion comparisons and calculations made for each selected-AEs. Predictive accuracy is expected to improve with the growing GIPADD database. Its application can further extend to drug reposition, prediction of drug targets and therapeutic effects. This example only listed some of the interesting examples for the AE-to-EF correlation found using GIPADD. Within the scope of the subject invention, the development of additional advantageous and beneficial AE-to-EF correlations, ML models, and resulting AE predictions are contemplated.


Within the scope of the subject invention are contemplated additional improvements with respect to the AI algorithms, refinement procedures, and training data preparation processes in this example. As one illustrative but non-limiting example, with more data, the prediction results can shift from a classification model to a regression model to predict actual probability or frequency of occurrence for certain AEs. Multi-label classification models were also tested to potentially predict all listed AEs at once, although this example separated each respective AE for AI model creation to rule out overfitting and data imbalance due to limited data size.


Another limitation of the current method is that some AEs of interest can have weak correlation to GI pacemaker activity. GIPADD focuses only on the GI pacemaker activity, while there are many other types of electrical signals produced from other tissues and organs that embodiments of the subject invention can translate and decode. Within the scope of the subject invention, the inventors contemplate building similar electrophysiological drug databases for pacemaker activity found in other organs, such as the heart and uterus. In certain embodiments, EF big-data can advantageously improve drug discovery and scientific development with respect to a variety of AEs and EFs.


Embodiments can provide information targeting for personalised drug therapy. One goal of drug profiling based on GI pacemaker activity can be to enable the development of personalised drug therapy. In the digital era, numerous drug databases are being and can be constructed, including (1) a network medicine approach to search the existing literature to reposition drugs [38]; (2) deep-learning approaches to study drug docking with potential target receptors [39,40]; (3) drug adverse effects databases, such as the Side Effects Resource (SIDER) and the Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System; and (4) the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (IUPHAR) guide to pharmacological listings. Research in the field of predicting drug adverse effect is still at an early stage [41]. Each drug database can have its strengths and limitations. For example, affinity values do not always correlate to the degree of physiological response of a drug. The EC50 or IC50 values are not universal in different cell, tissue, or animal models. Literature search approach can have over-focus on the explored area of research. The inventors believed creating a standardized test on drug physiological response could allow more reliable drug comparison within a certain system. Starting from the GI tract, the physiological effects of drugs on pacemaker activity could play a part in providing comprehensive information on potential drug effects on GI motility. Other standardized physiological databases can be developed for other tissue model, such as the brain and the heart. With or without the aid of artificial intelligence, clinicians and basic scientists can use these reference databases to identify the best drug therapy for their patients in the future.


Embodiments can provide a business model, system, or method that includes a unique drug-testing service on pacemaker potentials in gastrointestinal tissue, and consultancy based on expertise and a proprietary database. Pacemaker potentials can be recorded simultaneously from multiple microelectrodes embedded on a chip. Embodiments can provide systems and methods to enable an automatic, efficient, reliable, minimal error, and bias-free analysis technique to extract numerous of useful features from pacemaker signals for database construction. As more drugs are analyzed, more data are added into the database. The growing database becomes a more powerful resource and its predictive power to identify functional-effects increases. Thus, the profile of a novel chemical entity can be predicted with a high degree of accuracy. Embodiments can provide bespoke testing of drugs, chemical compounds, remedies, extracts or combination of the above, using a standardized protocol, as well as multiple potential applications of the database to create different machine learning models.


Embodiments can apply the MEA to record pacemaker activity. Embodiments can employ the use of the MEA technology for large-scale drug screening. Embodiments can advantageously employ data extracted from multiple novel features derived from pacemaker activity of gastrointestinal tissues recorded using the MEA technology for the construction of databases for predictive and classification purposes using a standardized protocol.


One example application is that the inventors' methods could provide insights into the potential of a drug to induce GI-related side effects. The predictive power is unique and has the potential to identify problem compounds early, to save millions of dollars for pharmaceutical companies engaged in drug discovery with a drug testing report generated quickly (e.g., generated in less than 3 days, for certain embodiments; alternatively in less than 1 week; alternatively in less than 24 hours; alternatively in less than 1 hour.) Using the predictive power of the inventors' current database, the inventors have already refined an analytical model that predicts whether a drug could induce nausea or diarrhea with almost 70% accuracy. Embodiments can provide more powerful models, predicting a wider variety of effects, from a broader selection of candidates, with greater accuracy and confidence.


Embodiments can provide insights on the potentials on whether a drug could ameliorate GI dysrhythmia or treat GI-related side effects. Medicines or remedies can be tested in combination with known drugs that caused dysrhythmia. Other disease, transgenic or pre-treatment animal models can also be advantageously tested or predicted. The standardized method and analytical pipelines can also be applied in these experiment protocols for evaluation of GI dysrhythmia.


Embodiments of the database and related systems and methods can provide further improvements including but not limited to:

    • (1) The service speed can be significantly improved by having multiple MEA platforms and a greater network of technicians, clinicians, or researchers driving data collection. (e.g., Having multiple MEA headstages connected to one MEA machine can improve speed and throughput. For example, one current MEA system produced by Multichannel system has 4 headstages connected to one system. It is possible for one researcher to operate at least 4 or more headstages at the same time. Certain embodiments including development, testing, and examples disclosed herein were completed on a system having only 1 headstage connected. Connecting additional headstages, such as two, three, four, or more than four headstages is contemplated within the scope of the subject invention.)
    • (2) The predictive power can improve with more drugs added into the database. (e.g., (1) Drugs that are known to cause certain side effects listed in the SIDER Side Effect Resource database can be added to improve the database by reference to known or expected results. (2) Drugs that are known to have affinity towards certain receptor-of-interest listed in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology can be added to improve the database by reference to known or expected results. Additional known results, or additional drugs with or without known results can be added to improve performance.)
    • (3) Additional applications of the database can be added for testing other types of hypothesis. (e.g., (1) Evaluating drugs' potential to induce GI dysrhythmia. (2) Predicting and classifying drugs' agonistic or antagonistic actions. (3) Predicting drugs' adverse effects.)
    • (4) Application can be expanded to include pharmaceuticals, food industry, research units, traditional remedies, or other industries and companies that can benefit from testing products (e.g., food, chemicals, drugs, traditional Chinese medicine, remedies, and related or unrelated products.)


Embodiments have already been applied to test >100 exemplar drugs and the data of these drugs has already been analyzed automatically using a program for extracting at least 24 slow wave features stored in the inventors' proprietary database to provide basic predictive power as referenced herein.


Embodiments can advantageously employ advanced or improved hardware (e.g., upgrading from a 60 channel platform to a 256 channel platform.) It is within the scope of certain embodiments of the subject invention that algorithms and parameters for slow wave features extractions can be improved for refinement to fit particular hypothesis and situation. Specific classification or predictive learning models can be improved and refined by using a selected sub-set of highly-focused data. The inventors have built a specific embodiment with 4 sub-databases focusing on the drug effects on the stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon. The databases can be further extended (e.g., to use the heart, muscles, or central nervous system.) Embodiments can be further optimized for evaluating adverse effects such as cardiac dysrhythmia and epilepsy.


In certain embodiments, business models in accordance with the subject invention can provide one or more protocols that can be altered based upon a clients' instruction and requirement. These altered protocols can provide advantageously provide highly valuable experiments and data analysis, and special orders can be received as a specific source of revenue. However, the standardized protocol for adding drugs into the database can be maintained in certain embodiments, to maintain high consistency of the drug profile stored in the database and advantageously enhance the clinical or commercial value thereof.


It should be understood that the examples and embodiments described herein are for illustrative purposes only and that various modifications or changes in light thereof will be suggested to persons skilled in the art and are to be included within the spirit and purview of this application and the scope of the appended claims. In addition, any elements or limitations of any invention or embodiment thereof disclosed herein can be combined with any and/or all other elements or limitations (individually or in any combination) or any other invention or embodiment thereof disclosed herein, and all such combinations are contemplated with the scope of the invention without limitation thereto.


APPENDED TABLE 2

The following pages contain the data of Table 2. The numerical values of all slow-wave features showing the effects of dopamine on pacemaker potentials along the gastrointestinal tract of Suncus murinus, subdivided into sub-tables 2.1 through 2.8.

    • Table 2.1 ‘True values (basic parameters)’, showing the true numerical values of 10 slow-wave features listed with the date and sequence of each experiment;
    • Table 2.2 ‘True values (DFA & SampEn)’, showing the calculated DFA and SampEn values listed with the date and sequence of each experiment;
    • Table 2.3 ‘True mean and SD’, showing the calculated means and standard deviations of all slow-wave features grouped by concentration and tissue type;
    • Table 2.4 ‘Percentage change mean and SD’, showing the calculated means and standard deviations of the percentage change of all slow-wave features grouped by concentration and tissue type;
    • Table 2.5 ‘p-value’, showing the calculated p-values of all slow-wave features for comparisons between the baseline and post-treatment recordings;
    • Table 2.6 ‘Pattern(B)’, showing the calculated percentage values of the dominant activation time pattern based on the baseline data and the respective p-value;
    • Table 2.7 ‘Pattern(P)’, showing the calculated percentage values of the dominant activation time pattern based on the post-treatment data and the respective p-values; and
    • Table 2.8 ‘Radar’, showing the percentage change values used for plotting the radar diagram in FIG. 4.


















TABLE 2.1








A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I











1
True values of ten features and their percentage change b
















2







Dominant
frequency


3
Date
File no.
Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Active Ch.
Pre
Post


4
May 14, 2019
23
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
22
6.445313
7.723722


5
May 15, 2019
13
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
35
7.366071
10.94866


6
May 20, 2019
13
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
54
8.810764
6.456163


7
May 21, 2019
13
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
5
6.914063
7.03125


8
May 1, 2019
26
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
37
9.739231
10.23015


9
May 15, 2019
27
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
5
6.445313
8.203125


10
May 20, 2019
23
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
27
7.942708
6.445313


11
Nov. 26, 2019
10
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
1
26.36719
24.60938


12
Nov. 27, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
25.19531
24.02344


13
Nov. 28, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
8
30.46875
25.92773


14
Nov. 26, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
1
25.19531
23.4375


15
Nov. 25, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
2
28.125
26.36719


16
Apr. 23, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
2
26.95313
26.95313


17
Apr. 24, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
3
31.05469
26.5625


18
Apr. 24, 2019
14
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
29
27.53906
25.82166


19
May 2, 2019
14
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
21
31.05469
29.82701


20
May 3, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
1
30.46875
30.46875


21
Apr. 23, 2019
21
dop
duodenun
100 uM
4
1
25.78125
26.36719


22
May 2, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 uM

3
28.71094
20.11719


23
Apr. 15, 2019
7
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
8
35.15625
33.98438


24
Apr. 23, 2019
11
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
10
20.56641
16.93359


25
Aug. 5, 2019
7
dop
duodenun
 10 uM
5
45
28.90625
30.85938


26
Aug. 5, 2019
19
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
38
25.51912
20.60033


27
Aug. 6, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
2
30.46875
36.32813


28
Aug. 6, 2019
17
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
57
31.05469
26.97368


29
Aug. 26, 2019
14
dop
duodenun
 10 uM
5
36
29.81771
28.71094


30
Aug. 15, 2019
13
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
34
29.88281
31.91636


31
Aug. 12, 2019
7
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
5
32.22656
33.98438


32
Aug. 12, 2019
18
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
48
28.71094
27.53906


33
Aug. 13, 2019
17
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
57
32.22656
31.05469


34
Aug. 14, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
28
27.28795
26.01144


35
Aug. 26, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
4
25.78125
26.66016


36
Aug. 14, 2019
14
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
10
27.53906
9.375


37
Aug. 13, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
56
32.8125
33.39844


38
Nov. 25, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
10
25.19531
26.95313


39
Nov. 26, 2019
5
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
50
32.80078
24.63281


40
Nov. 27, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
49
25.1714
25.18335


41
Nov. 28, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
42
24.59542
28.04129


42
Nov. 28, 2019
8
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
55
25.19531
24.62003


43
Nov. 26, 2019
11
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
9
24.60938
8.723958


44
Apr. 23, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
3
27.53906
32.8125


45
Apr. 24, 2019
5
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
12
28.125
26.95313


46
Apr. 24, 2019
15
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
6
26.36719
26.36719


47
May 2, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
7
27.20424
26.95313


48
Apr. 15, 2019
8
dop
ileum
100 uM

1
30.46875
29.29688


49
Apr. 23, 2019
12
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
3
27.92969
23.24219


50
Aug. 5, 2019
8
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
22
30.84162
29.50994


51
Aug. 5, 2019
20
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
56
27.58092
26.95313


52
Aug. 6, 2019
5
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
36
30.46875
29.41081


53
Oct. 14, 2019
5
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
20
27.53906
25.78125


54
Oct. 14, 2019
13
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
58
26.37729
29.88281


55
Aug. 15, 2019
2
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
3
24.60938
25.78125


56
Aug. 15, 2019
14
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
25
33.98438
12.75


57
Aug. 13, 2019
5
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
38
25.93544
27.53906


58
Aug. 13, 2019
18
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
57
29.29688
32.22656


59
Aug. 26, 2019
2
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
4
25.19531
24.16992


60
Aug. 26, 2019
15
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
38
29.29688
29.37397


61
Aug. 12, 2019
8
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
6
30.46875
32.42188


62
Aug. 12, 2019
19
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
56
29.88281
26.42997


63
Aug. 14, 2019
2
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
47
11.13281
6.694648


64
Nov. 25, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 nM
7
15
26.36719
28.04688


65
Nov. 26, 2019
6
dop
colon
100 nM
7
1
29.88281
28.71094


66
Nov. 26, 2019
12
dop
colon
100 nM
7
50
26.36719
25.58203


67
Nov. 28, 2019
9
dop
colon
100 nM
7
56
23.4375
24.60938


68
Nov. 27, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 nM
7
3
26.95313
26.36719


69
Nov. 28, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 nM
7
51
31.05469
26.52803


70
Apr. 23, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 uM
4
7
28.71094
25.27902


71
Apr. 23, 2019
13
dop
colon
100 uM
4
34
25.78125
25.78125


72
Apr. 24, 2019
6
dop
colon
100 uM
4
40
28.125
28.22754


73
Apr. 24, 2019
16
dop
colon
100 uM
4
20
27.59766
26.95313


74
May 2, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 uM
4
16
27.53906
27.53906


75
May 2, 2019
16
dop
colon
100 uM
4
28
29.29688
28.08315


76
May 3, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 uM
4
8
26.95313
25.78125


77
May 3, 2019
18
dop
colon
100 uM
4
16
28.125
29.88281


78
Apr. 15, 2019
9
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2
31.05469
29.29688


79
Aug. 5, 2019
9
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
11
29.88281
32.9723


80
Aug. 6, 2019
6
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
35
28.71094
33.95089


81
Aug. 6, 2019
19
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
34
32.22656
32.8125


82
Aug. 15, 2019
3
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
31
25.78125
27.53906


83
Aug. 15, 2019
15
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
12
30.22461
18.60352


84
Aug. 5, 2019
21
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
35
30.60268
35.74219


85
Aug. 12, 2019
9
dop
colon
 1 um
6
3
38.08594
35.35156


86
Aug. 13, 2019
6
dop
colon
 1 um
6
15
33.98438
35.97656


87
Aug. 14, 2019
3
dop
colon
 1 um
6
10
29.88281
31.05469


88
Aug. 26, 2019
3
dop
colon
 1 um
6
47
25.19531
26.95313


89
Aug. 13, 2019
19
dop
colon
 1 um
6
5
29.29688
32.8125


90
Aug. 26, 2019
16
dop
colon
 1 um
6
5
29.88281
29.29688


91
Aug. 12, 2019
20
dop
colon
 1 um
6
35
27.60603
29.07924


92
Aug. 14, 2019
16
dop
colon
 1 um
6
12
29.88281
32.22656






J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R











1
between pre and post drug treatment












2
Average frequency(cl
Brady-rhythm(%)
Normal-rhythm(%)
Tachy-rhythm(%)
Dominant
















3
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre


4
9.561708
11.26781
0.702724
0.95783
55.53314
29.48913
43.39607
68.72364
1227.218


5
8.647831
12.9371
7.528376
9.013905
67.02229
8.325051
25.0048
81.76457
458.7314


6
10.38604
10.59835
24.47333
38.09719
52.93075
17.96585
21.79778
43.56968
1744.789


7
9.794111
9.306986
4.916558
9.888803
48.83686
45.17027
45.73647
44.67631
100.7546


8
10.89319
12.21992
16.01149
16.82949
62.56991
34.37458
21.05162
48.12517
497.7641


9
8.874609
12.20006
0.247932
6.766241
49.89498
16.574
49.75311
74.93873
1793.166


10
10.77698
13.79893
5.038936
26.35707
48.96856
13.31605
45.72098
59.56522
393.4822


11
23.01509
20.91156
37.89212
86.85953
53.31098
2.712224
4.356228
2.599518
417.118


12
22.48877
20.85175
35.00877
83.44448
42.59103
10.97897
8.732479
1.010794
1147.234


13
27.4351
21.27277
38.16942
93.00501
44.82778
0.781853
16.25106
1.988016
1443.707


14
24.1382
19.63767
19.47013
76.57593
59.58656
8.435004
16.68372
2.721179
873.2814


15
23.51808
21.59824
47.95507
95.99937
30.27727
1.174188
16.72746
2.186344
198.3337


16
24.18206
18.80943
23.08264
52.84548
57.93899
44.06731
18.64436
2.455235
574.6286


17
28.37057
20.19272
37.89886
94.66879
41.96888
1.074101
19.84343
3.28245
774.1595


18
24.55507
19.77358
45.85188
81.74657
46.43024
12.18443
6.396083
5.091291
3815.678


19
25.00091
22.67415
35.11847
93.19102
57.09641
4.110334
7.238548
1.932962
1074.115


20
27.77748
29.154
47.58485
20.55675
43.72677
76.50087
7.835652
2.590627
623.7462


21
24.63347
23.13298
45.95207
23.94544
40.27593
57.82702
12.09501
15.78294
600.9052


22
24.03309
18.78526
42.13317
79.86209
44.59376
17.88097
12.35006
1.837673
1192.399


23
30.21622
32.15102
66.35003
89.38949
27.31384
5.869405
5.376236
4.059066
275.646


24
17.21501
14.89922
45.39172
81.28258
35.24876
5.420653
9.507025
11.16407
616.2309


25
26.40578
26.14276
37.13837
38.58378
46.03734
17.16079
16.29396
43.53401
309.4348


26
22.96496
21.75055
25.26747
74.13106
58.74137
1.641425
10.70122
22.87859
318.9673


27
29.74202
31.8498
16.92845
14.59392
40.86769
6.786203
41.26258
74.64229
63.98298


28
28.94213
25.02344
37.36323
98.78689
59.16838
0.317464
3.077602
0.587098
1151.063


29
28.12954
20.35077
18.17385
86.48223
74.82886
8.481198
6.740015
4.151272
496.2128


30
21.33653
27.1472
54.26617
27.14185
34.62257
12.57223
10.23487
59.71816
142.74561


31
31.45344
34.02021
17.71402
9.453614
41.59315
16.07745
39.75197
73.07456
150.7896


32
27.12635
26.61375
15.91368
81.18864
77.91959
17.32737
5.867268
1.238002
1635.2931


33
29.87376
27.41205
23.63806
80.36939
61.20529
18.63229
14.50213
0.71264
394.8158


34
26.81874
25.42445
23.44339
42.00246
46.3375
37.12503
29.49039
20.14541
1348.785


35
23.66523
18.12443
21.30036
52.50475
56.14845
10.34308
21.60151
35.58082
606.5954


36
20.31598
16.81574
52.64321
73.71424
43.09806
13.93247
3.473164
9.75916
2274.674


37
32.73585
30.8792
25.80182
36.9451
27.753
57.91925
41.40798
4.408742
517.2236


38
21.5008
15.6716
28.04274
69.03422
50.43
3.398043
15.05664
26.84341
823.8119


39
29.49786
21.58062
39.96421
91.91163
54.47505
0.158058
5.241688
0.65703
1065.657


40
22.44392
19.95531
23.57812
47.56762
58.985
33.17797
8.69058
7.062949
1103.877


41
23.26789
24.15997
14.91305
24.15507
51.34031
10.31048
26.49862
63.20838
635.8233


42
22.22284
20.36602
37.18505
43.60992
49.7192
38.57004
3.401657
11.75232
678.0197


43
21.90659
14.66174
46.83729
83.88278
42.21614
2.16001
5.234741
10.49075
375.429


44
22.01549
24.25948
34.91184
39.14774
55.89276
2.46986
8.688286
55.38769
539.3218


45
25.44041
23.81375
34.11563
65.8486
46.74299
28.5543
18.82791
4.715564
2646.308


46
23.97462
18.94477
34.66778
60.37298
55.3223
26.06684
9.139108
12.06272
434.2366


47
24.3039
23.56202
44.43525
48.60932
44.36138
46.40256
10.39721
4.48638
1034.608


48
26.70159
28.15263
43.94828
50.77686
41.88166
18.18352
13.53993
30.43492
702.3499


49
23.48155
26.51379
56.861
28.04064
27.34696
28.61078
13.53112
42.58756
73.88376


50
29.3046
25.17941
27.80785
80.36584
46.63693
15.36637
24.89147
2.528434
320.4661


51
27.18617
23.46757
12.9167
46.28354
70.84217
31.42071
15.19972
18.5881
559.6343


52
27.49004
26.9353
46.30426
49.20339
45.866
5.694503
5.716511
43.80599
242.7488


53
25.72788
22.37078
33.74669
95.20372
46.98657
1.251167
18.96669
2.878589
2471.307


54
25.50479
27.00689
20.87148
15.35338
56.91899
0.908526
21.77765
83.30626
3550.393


55
19.61153
15.71014
43.05477
65.7096
42.9074
3.6381
9.487383
29.80715
2550.74


56
29.56015
18.35914
44.97835
90.91006
46.3969
6.39318
8.304006
1.955372
430.1626


57
24.39005
25.7971
26.3842
27.64547
47.63962
4.23857
24.73712
66.97909
521.4505


58
28.48681
29.13575
18.22729
18.76671
47.42673
4.290776
34.04526
76.29107
1348.042


59
22.68226
20.78601
37.14951
69.06186
50.88879
22.72164
7.664293
1.914616
2170.976


60
27.38278
25.0637
16.96646
42.90912
49.9792
37.92754
32.75037
18.3245
595.0529


61
28.40995
26.98669
31.60834
52.26899
26.21879
11.70518
41.50777
34.91441
24.22939


62
28.70599
26.30138
35.28087
81.12237
31.22298
13.13944
33.21641
5.235753
1116.183


63
14.89803
14.44632
26.62858
32.05949
30.03805
14.35364
42.14034
52.93241
1717.478


64
21.91618
23.63703
45.05987
26.32658
51.48506
14.05074
2.698067
59.08785
794.3071


65
26.47561
22.79427
40.48592
85.69764
44.8252
7.160775
13.89316
5.937764
313.0396


66
24.07018
20.46492
23.94774
75.66113
69.0487
18.87442
6.330044
2.393511
4266.695


67
22.00919
23.57862
24.45042
7.339112
60.88265
8.653445
9.402291
82.51471
4703.476


68
21.7334
24.15375
54.24205
24.29163
31.54276
67.69084
11.40679
6.889918
151.8095


69
27.20392
25.02445
48.29437
71.3197
34.60031
19.27502
16.50752
9.045152
1236.506


70
25.72217
22.79209
49.1448
95.09784
48.36238
1.326688
2.246251
1.425888
2580.04


71
22.02441
22.95608
36.30052
25.14785
58.93185
66.43853
3.409913
7.89333
2533.357


72
26.3914
24.44574
27.2814
27.18348
66.17106
50.69786
6.36905
21.53319
7210.319


73
25.94239
24.52726
17.60202
27.80757
48.43337
68.0555
33.52019
3.690399
695.4764


74
24.36212
21.47674
38.37525
54.68222
55.0869
33.37123
5.499504
11.11587
2999.823


75
24.89009
23.77947
32.46554
79.54411
62.12981
15.07362
5.0554
4.656427
3502.515


76
24.61988
22.29292
34.63721
74.21758
51.85196
19.1005
12.54569
6.209923
1017.461


77
24.73906
25.37517
43.65331
31.49113
45.3639
25.1467
10.27239
42.64712
250.1025


78
29.55943
28.55308
33.06713
70.19816
41.92666
22.00668
23.68203
6.010998
1092.505


79
30.67517
31.71247
12.13458
14.0577
41.95848
14.31628
44.38948
69.5837
782.9606


80
29.84783
31.77773
7.745447
11.74236
43.99969
2.4495
47.37744
81.78756
1397.745


81
32.12547
32.04054
22.58195
21.8576
41.4262
47.47349
34.18464
29.74224
2608.058


82
20.53619
25.80517
42.45769
13.46912
51.5152
7.132113
5.410597
78.86244
9696.359


83
24.99209
19.05651
45.45818
86.75482
45.11614
4.435274
8.865949
7.770988
713.4226


84
29.35024
34.74601
31.53189
7.018991
30.47643
2.751965
36.86332
82.27797
341.7797


85
35.6375
34.24565
27.97466
80.68776
40.50235
9.670105
17.57384
3.777305
213.6953


86
32.62014
34.05263
30.13049
18.69604
43.16979
19.73727
23.14059
57.30871
726.26181


87
25.92098
25.8232
54.74521
33.43821
41.17399
5.7991
3.355128
59.45696
2978.365


88
22.65473
24.55266
23.97898
15.74663
61.0391
1.642471
13.00342
82.36136
6045.057


89
28.29088
32.63799
19.02978
2.283395
42.45101
0.974505
38.26148
96.37144
1761.5621


90
27.64394
28.06296
51.52971
42.14129
42.15195
55.13875
5.876477
2.448153
721.282


91
26.52632
28.90267
34.97629
13.96258
30.30604
20.28998
33.9857
65.11567
475.6059


92
18.95195
28.27993
57.34058
19.62094
30.14803
2.642974
11.57971
77.01969
1178.321






S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
AA





1





















2
Power(uV2
PPAmp(uV)
Slope(V/s)
Period(s)
Velocity (mm/s)
















3
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post


4
114.5817
165.9297
107.3751
130.9438
99.65345
7.075897
7.818339
10.54026
5.247322


5
95.3892
126.4181
129.1386
83.04502
115.438
8.343485
6.864122
13.08662
10.45441


6
1189.991
263.6145
202.1354
191.8213
161.2498
6.501189
6.719058
2.255657
1.850111


7
163.7252
125.7761
203.0095
95.12597
132.3394
8.259471
6.711759
2.378948
7.82299


8
142.7906
132.8589
108.8174
103.7243
98.85302
7.443923
9.28293
1.482276
1.973113


9
26.2538
195.0974
75.14287
137.624
61.88166
7.182138
7.864453




10
39.61768
129.1616
62.59825
92.4259
59.0803
7.359625
8.408058
33.9049
19.83138


11
323.1121
153.7171
106.1835
265.3663
150.4249
2.602563
3.777865
19.52631
10.71464


12
778.3611
241.9834
155.551
353.9343
228.7753
2.704899
2.77253
9.120996
13.39762


13
402.9964
262.1883
150.7297
467.6659
225.7625
2.15127
2.948424
17.17456
5.636935


14
136.8399
142.6976
72.02247
218.7107
102.2567
2.56477
3.765535
4.376614
4.155531


15
269.8224
164.4351
86.22445
302.8666
127.0351
2.567276
3.08918




16
136.5489
160.6492
96.3345
267.3938
159.1954
2.555149
3.324514
0.26342
0.769102


17
120.9378
177.2793
106.8458
304.6884
154.2015
2.1633
3.852423
5.751987
4.911966


18
535.7254
341.5446
164.8908
542.7577
214.1793
2.382746
3.229378
13.57859
13.0901


19
344.6335
167.8949
132.8325
282.525
207.787
2.070571
2.83071
1.215978
1.526288


20
514.2087
216.4564
126.6293
412.9497
250.4974
2.113444
2.024607
0.197216
0.62709


21
389.8946
236.9042
111.2261
387.0567
167.1171
2.367375
2.449807




22
96.86454
156.8366
96.59675
255.4911
129.7168
2.226301
3.671468




23
1238.814
150.2463
160.9008
271.0603
279.602
1.828155
1.792791
5.697241
15.935


24
119.382
186.231
93.20696
176.177
80.39183
4.267108
6.129933
56.11221
40.67752


25
116.5098
122.5289
86.93794
225.6775
144.5061
2.321544
2.931393
31.05167
24.30357


26
36.12908
115.2835
89.01767
203.8758
97.17546
2.638557
5.966667
14.52993
16.47798


27
56.51848
82.67876
96.39202
146.9318
185.2119
3.060334
2.597685
1.689907
0.900179


28
365.4525
152.1231
119.8154
277.6937
218.047
2.837064
2.389311
23.53547
12.61442


29
60.73251
132.0147
84.86065
215.3113
103.3986
2.495328
5.438827
11.03163
10.66112


30
191.6138
100.8303
107.2834
144.6977
174.984
4.709191
2.46135
24.80975
20.37699


31
198.5221
103.202
125.0108
187.8575
224.9658
2.009352
1.854321
8.624594
9.610183


32
884.6228
240.0076
136.3531
454.1182
210.3007
2.461381
2.22742
4.473829
27.69106


33
486.3765
128.489
113.7238
219.5026
182.9395
2.472732
3.233809
5.510669
12.9647


34
459.7058
237.836
136.0856
386.1336
206.6121
2.158745
2.596941
9.003392
6.260467


35
132.4678
167.8975
110.0723
297.8451
161.8776
2.404422
3.998268
0.910399
0.946663


36
433.2889
248.2676
174.8678
404.8222
266.4118
2.456137
3.434789




37
396.2034
185.9384
117.1964
340.9864
192.1192
1.886906
2.022532
46.23518
21.72633


38
173.6875
165.0947
125.0003
225.6506
129.4994
2.738254
5.263444
7.345775
8.223719


39
282.6735
184.8864
137.6931
323.0908
207.8763
2.190773
2.803142
9.279636
10.59234


40
253.4256
184.7064
124.7412
291.0957
188.7427
2.585893
3.16586
14.11728
33.36407


41
181.3495
161.7087
133.9181
221.8828
184.8274
2.439162
2.76411
6.729791
29.62461


42
111.9631
165.9219
110.7474
311.2537
153.3792
2.651738
3.649255
12.41127
13.21107


43
62.05303
128.8378
83.14867
172.2187
96.04136
3.370983
4.746814
12.97174
33.41779


44
122.6701
140.0502
156.839
216.2564
198.6001
2.377403
2.187568
0.300642
0.34974


45
1044.424
305.448
169.4265
478.1394
236.7072
2.177965
2.788364
9.421553
10.54687


46
78.22819
134.7922
111.6934
187.9285
131.0513
2.845029
4.334366
19.80925
16.86316


47
273.5222
211.3909
110.9285
303.418
166.0152
2.328703
2.720836
0.29928
0.846151


48
522.826
181.668
171.0447
313.385
289.8117
2.029871
1.989574




49
362.9651
129.5328
101.0068
184.0508
160.0681
3.152846
2.251582
3.793807
2.714422


50
240.5102
131.4992
132.2815
228.2261
239.4007
2.320671
2.783344
37.48715
31.93905


51
71.37566
142.4964
95.01166
244.2492
151.2174
2.469433
4.186888
12.06478
13.65904


52
94.91146
135.3635
109.0977
240.9907
193.1793
2.086123
2.972784
14.27186
5.671977


53
931.0778
323.6532
157.088
534.2644
230.7204
2.40527
2.774037
12.50303
23.86599


54
1624.65
391.4931
222.4924
679.7269
407.8716
2.161768
2.095084
19.05636
12.71085


55
1084.71
339.1799
229.2742
507.1531
311.8588
2.544906
2.86057




56
1274.025
143.2558
98.27781
251.2834
133.1093
2.125833
3.663375
10.97005
10.09436


57
343.1104
133.2285
109.5375
211.2772
145.7456
2.534374
2.881355
9.843357
8.861728


58
812.751
197.4446
165.8517
341.9993
290.7222
2.10914
2.250775
30.93573
108.4671


59
624.8647
252.0604
149.0236
368.4705
204.7116
2.455393
3.026183
0.482641
1.237183


60
146.7519
147.66
106.9751
232.7025
164.4119
2.330963
3.128523
12.0509
8.267479


61
16.57772
67.00093
47.93216
112.7038
77.16624
2.817529
4.418039




62
588.1552
218.4045
124.9097
407.0866
195.4186
1.977173
2.375484
10.94663
18.63569


63
689.6141
293.5812
261.9851
431.9896
352.5149
3.487382
3.584747
36.4162
20.88166


64
650.0229
185.7794
144.9923
252.9082
249.5184
2.349213
2.596775
6.876612
8.191511


65
149.7697
176.2134
123.1894
281.488
182.2804
2.328648
3.50807
14.35902
4.353836


66
403.722
290.9637
176.6312
500.671
236.8424
2.412022
2.889371
14.08453
35.11098


67
6346.002
349.3109
464.9393
463.7021
691.9626
2.544697
2.340555
8.152552
19.75282


68
576.1343
117.6686
198.0989
182.729
374.1664
2.360742
2.277285
19.85148
31.21643


69
369.6639
265.4292
145.8128
461.1794
242.4655
1.977726
2.218092
18.11598
9.447945


70
1612.128
329.1611
226.7319
462.8919
317.1157
2.214458
2.341692
0.584388
0.730249


71
1871.52
276.7989
266.4024
471.253
397.3228
2.280536
2.281396
10.31011
11.69463


72
1787.827
422.7414
248.1864
638.8179
376.1577
2.109036
2.374731
8.602977
8.064947


73
1719.941
217.1532
175.786
352.1141
287.2303
2.242094
2.310789
18.45824
15.69399


74
475.4371
308.24
184.8928
579.7324
328.3644
2.275548
2.364138
1.272656
1.249231


75
688.5715
245.7697
194.8439
437.6195
303.2619
2.232123
2.355961
6.325067
9.626219


76
353.6664
231.4232
172.9365
371.5585
226.1931
2.802044
2.845814
0.346498
1.47046


77
109.4568
134.6899
102.8972
215.6064
143.0274
2.190859
3.461695
36.36143
12.73328


78
1002.6
239.6791
225.0186
423.9153
312.0998
1.889763
1.989571




79
149.2984
189.4024
143.6341
372.8339
280.9362
2.115422
2.08285
14.49993
12.26728


80
141.6908
214.5119
113.6276
394.5327
206.5147
1.874584
2.211204
7.943391
7.17274


81
2555.805
421.1839
254.5048
718.2305
404.8793
1.818608
1.907673
11.0747
6.903926


82
15634.01
458.3796
535.8893
725.3523
934.4866
2.519453
2.132585
12.63855
11.93817


83
100.9446
185.3204
104.1683
309.3891
150.7654
2.438218
3.52994
14.84196
14.83116


84
490.2913
199.9551
190.3956
359.6217
361.3398
1.82889
1.864687
21.13738
22.24272


85
84.54273
108.777
92.22566
217.0438
170.0818
1.957476
2.068392
5.342699
10.54298


86
311.0559
190.9859
176.9006
365.2557
336.6746
1.791417
1.867827
13.21651
15.7851


87
4571.453
373.3604
394.4544
656.0935
665.7796
2.026475
2.105662
14.48009
12.00594


88
5798.707
433.8095
367.6474
690.9838
596.7559
2.242203
2.131975
5.650442
13.79302


89
2526.957
271.0322
284.6706
468.0134
512.0608
1.886076
1.772943
0.348905
0.619782


90
530.1671
234.731
136.6338
376.7453
220.1576
2.060946
2.06026
4.282803
4.145504


91
305.8722
145.415
132.3897
227.43
217.4613
2.275413
2.048201
11.47573
3.32435


92
3498.434
257.4237
285.7518
431.6641
485.2503
2.180801
1.91454
109.8668
36.49852






AB
AC
AD
AE
AF
AG
AH
Al
AJ





1























2
Percentage change (%)






















3
DF
AF
B
N
T
DP
PPAmp
Slope
Period


4
19.83471
17.84305
0.255106
−26.044
25.32757
−90.6633
−35.2888
−23.896
10.49255


5
48.63636
49.59933
1.485529
−58.6972
56.75977
−79.2059
2.15198
39.00654
−17.7308


6
−26.7241
2.044148
13.62386
−34.9649
21.7719
−31.7974
−23.3216
−15.9375
3.351217


7
1.694915
−4.97364
4.972245
−3.6666
−1.06016
62.499
61.40546
39.12015
−18.7386


8
5.04065
12.17945
0.817998
−28.1953
27.07355
−71.3136
−18.0955
−4.69639
24.70481


9
27.27272
37.47152
6.518309
−33.321
25.18562
−98.5359
−61.4844
−55.0357
9.500166


10
−18.8524
28.04079
21.31813
−35.6525
13.84424
−89.9315
−51.5349
−36.0782
14.24574


11
−6.66666
−9.13979
48.96741
−50.5988
−1.75671
−22.537
−30.9228
−43.3142
45.15941


12
−4.65114
−7.27928
48.43571
−31.6121
−7.72169
−32.1532
−35.7183
−35.3622
2.500315


13
−14.9039
−22.4615
54.83559
−44.0459
−14.263
−72.086
−42.5109
−51.7257
1 37.05504


14
−6.97673
−18.6448
57.1058
−51.1516
−13.9625
−84.3304
49.5279
−53.2457
46.81765


15
−6.24999
−8.16325
48.0443
−29.1031
−14.5411
36.04466
−47.5632
−58.0558
20.3291


16
0
−22.2174
29.76285
−13.8717
−16.1891
−76.237
−40.0343
−40.464
30.11039


17
−14.4654
−28.8251
56.76993
−40.8948
−16.561
−84.3782
−39.7302
−49.3904
78.08083


18
−6.23624
−19.4725
35.89469
−34.2458
−1.30479
−85.9599
−51.722
−60.5387
35.53175


19
−3.95328
−9.30669
58.07255
−52.9861
−5.30559
−67.9147
−20.8835
−26.4536
36.71155


20
0
4.955501
−27.0281
32.7741
−5.24503
−17.5612
−41.4989
−39.3395
−4.2034


21
2.272737
−6.09127
−22.0066
17.55109
3.68793
−35.1155
−53.0502
−56.8236
3.482


22
−29.932
−21.8359
37.72892
−26.7128
−10.5124
−91.8765
−38.4093
−49.2284
64.91337


23
−3.33332
6.403183
23.03946
−21.4444
−1.31717
349.4221
7.091356
3.151218
−1.93441


24
−17.6639
−13.4522
35.89086
−29.8281
1.657045
−80.6271
−49.9509
−54.3687
43.65545


25
6.756774
−0.99607
1.44541
−28.8766
27.24005
−62.3475
−29.047
−35.9679
26.26911


26
−19.2749
−5.2881
48.86359
−57.0999
12.17737
−88.6731
−22.7837
−52.336
126.1337


27
19.23079
7.086876
−2.33453
−34.0815
33.37971
−11.6664
16.58619
26.05297
−15.1176


28
−13.1414
−13.5397
61.42366
−58.8509
−2.4905
−68.2509
−21.2379
−21.4793
−15.7823


29
−3.71179
−27.6534
68.30838
−66.3477
−2.58874
−87.7608
−35.7188
−51.9772
117.9604


30
6.805083
27.23343
−27.1243
−22.0503
49.48329
34.23447
6.399961
20.93074
−47.7331


31
5.454569
8.160538
−8.26041
−25.5157
33.32259
31.65503
21.13215
19.75343
−7.71547


32
−4.08165
−1.88968
65.27496
−60.5922
−4.62927
−45.9043
−43.188
−53.6903
−9.50527


33
−3.63635
−8.24038
56.73133
−42.573
−13.7895
23.19074
−11.4914
−16.6573
30.77879


34
−4.67793
−5.19894
18.55907
−9.21247
9.34498
−65.917
−42.7817
−46.4921
20.29865


35
3.409105
−23.4133
31.20439
−45.8054
13.97931
−78.1621
−34.4408
−45.6504
66.28811


36
−65.9574
−17.229
21.07103
−29.1656
6.285996
−80.9516
−29.5648
−34.1904
39.84517


37
1.785722
−5.67161
11.14328
30.16625
−36.9992
−23.398
−36.9703
−43.6578
7.187745


38
6.976775
−27.1115
40.99148
−47.032
11.78677
−78.9166
−24.2857
−42.6107
92.21898


39
−24.9018
−26.84
51.94742
−54.317
−4.58466
−73.4743
−25.5256
−35.6601
27.95219


40
0.047475
−11.0881
23.9895
−25.807
−1.62763
−77.0422
−32.4651
−35.1613
22.42811


41
14.01021
3.833953
9.24202
−41.0298
36.70976
−71.478
−17.1856
−16.7004
13.32212


42
−2.28328
−8.35546
6.42487
−11.1492
8.350663
−83.4867
−33.2533
−50.7221
37.61748


43
−64.5503
−33.0716
37.04549
−40.0561
5.256009
−83.4714
−35.4625
−44.2329
40.81394


44
19.14894
10.19274
4.235902
−53.4229
46.69941
−77.2548
11.98769
−8.16451
−7.98494


45
−4.16667
−6.39401
31.73298
−18.1887
−14.1123
−60.5328
−44.5318
−50.4941
28.02614


46
0
−20.9799
25.7052
−29.2555
2.923611
−81.9849
−17.1366
−30.2653
52.34873


47
−0.92308
−3.05252
4.174069
2.041184
−5.91083
−73.5627
−47.5245
−45.285
16.83914


48
−3.84614
5.434283
6.82858
−23.6981
16.89499
−25.5605
−5.84765
−7.52215
−1.9852


49
−16.7832
12.91329
−28.8204
1.26382
29.05644
391.2651
−22.0222
−13.0305
−28.5857


50
4.3178
−14.0769
52.55799
−31.2706
−22.363
−24.9499
0.594909
4.896285
19.93704


51
−2.27617
−13.6783
33.36684
−39.4215
3.38838
−87.246
−33.3235
−38.0889
69.54856


52
−3.47221
−2.01797
2.89913
40.1715
38.08948
−60.9014
−19.4039
−19.8395
42.50282


53
−6.38297
−13.0485
61.45703
−45.7354
−16.0881
−62.3245
−51.4641
−56.8153
15.33163


54
13.28992
5.889482
−5.5181
−56.0105
61.52861
−54.2403
−43.1682
−39.9948
−3.0847


55
4.761883
−19.8933
22.65483
−39.2693
20.31977
−57.4747
−32.4034
−38.508
12.40376


56
−62.4828
−37.8923
45.93171
−40.0037
−6.34863
196.1729
−31.397
−47.0282
72.32657


57
6.183122
5.768951
1.26127
−43.4011
42.24197
−34.2008
−17.7822
−31.0169
13.69099


58
9.999973
2.278037
0.53942
−43.136
42.24581
−39.7088
−16.0009
−14.9933
6.715296


59
−4.06977
−8.36006
31.91235
−28.1672
−5.74968
−71.2173
−40.8778
−44.4429
23.24638


60
0.263134
−8.46912
25.94266
−12.0517
−14.4259
−75.338
−27.5531
−29.3467
34.2159


61
6.410273
−5.00972
20.66065
−14.5136
−6.59336
−31.5801
−28.4605
−31.5318
56.80545


62
−11.5546
−8.37668
45.8415
−18.0835
−27.9807
−47.3066
−42.8081
−51.9958
20.14548


63
−39.8656
−3.03201
5.43091
−15.6844
10.79207
−59.8473
−10.7623
−18.3974
2.791922


64
6.370379
7.851961
−18.7333
−37.4343
56.38978
−18.1648
−21.9546
−1.34033
10.53808


65
−3.92155
−13.9046
45.21172
−37.6644
−7.9554
−52.1563
−30.0908
−35.244
50.64836


66
−2.97779
−14.9781
51.71339
−50.1743
−3.93653
−90.5378
−39.2944
−52.695
19.79041


67
5.000021
7.130794
−17.1113
−52.2292
73.11242
34.92153
33.10186
49.22568
−8.02225


68
−2.17392
11.13655
−29.9504
36.14808
−4.51687
279.5114
68.35324
104.7657
−3.5352


69
−14.5764
−8.0116
23.02533
−15.3253
−7.46237
−70.1042
−45.0653
−47.4249
12.15366


70
−11.9534
−11.3913
45.95304
−47.0357
−0.82036
−37.5154
−31.1182
−31.4925
5.745585


71
0
4.230143
−11.1527
7.506679
4.483417
−26.1249
−3.756
−15.688
0.037718


72
0.364583
−7.37229
−0.09792
−15.4732
15.16414
−75.2046
−41.2912
−41.1166
12.59793


73
−2.33546
−5.4549
10.20556
19.62212
−29.8298
147.3041
−19.0498
−18.4269
3.063875


74
0
−11.8437
16.30698
−21.7157
5.61637
−84.1512
−40.0166
−43.3593
3.893126


75
−4.14286
−4.46212
47.07857
−47.0562
−0.39897
−80.3407
−20.7209
−30.7019
5.548018


76
−4.34783
−9.45153
39.58037
−32.7515
−6.33577
−65.2403
−25.2726
−39.1232
1.562057


77
6.25
2.571282
−12.1622
20.2172
32.37473
−56.2352
−23.6044
−33.6627
58.0063


78
−5.66037
−3.4045
37.13103
−19.92
−17.671
−8.22925
−6.11672
−26.3768
5.281509


79
10.33869
3.381562
1.92312
−27.6422
25.19422
−80.9316
−24.1646
−24.6484
−1.53974


80
18.25071
6.465797
3.996913
−41.5502
34.41012
−89.8629
−47.0297
−47.6559
17.95705


81
1.81819
−0.26437
−0.72435
6.04729
−4.4424
−2.00352
−39.5739
−43.6282
4.897427


82
6.818172
25.65705
−28.9886
−44.3831
73.45184
61.23588
16.9095
28.8321
−15.3552


83
−38.4491
−23.7498
41.29664
−40.6809
−1.09496
−85.8507
−43.7902
−51.27
44.77541


84
16.79431
18.38407
−24.5129
−27.7245
45.41465
43.45243
−4.78082
0.477752
1.957307


85
−7.1795
−3.90558
52.7131
−30.8322
−13.7965
−60.4377
−15.2158
−21.6371
5.666276


86
5.862046
4.391428
−11.4345
−23.4325
34.16812
−57.1703
−7.37505
−7.82496
4.265339


87
3.921586
−0.37722
−21.307
−35.3749
56.10183
53.48868
5.649769
1.476329
3.907623


88
6.976775
8.377632
−8.23235
−59.3966
69.35794
−4.07523
−15.2514
−13.6368
−4.91606


89
11.99998
15.36576
−16.7464
−41.4765
58.10996
43.44979
5.032022
9.411568
−5.99833


90
−1.96076
1.515775
−9.38842
12.9868
−3.42832
−26.4966
−41.7913
−41.5633
−0.03329


91
5.336551
8.958461
−21.0137
−10.0161
31.12997
−35.6879
−8.95733
−4.38319
−9.98553


92
7.843138
49.2191
−37.7196
−27.5051
65.43998
196.8999
11.00446
12.41387
−12.2093












AK





1



2



3
Velocity


4
−50.2164


5
−20.1137


6
−17.9791


7
228.8425


8
33.11374


9
−41.5088


10
−45.1272


11



12
46.88769


13
−67.1786


14
−5.05146


15
191.9683


16
−14.604


17



18
−3.59747


19
25.51931


20
217.9712


21
179.6968


22
−27.5068


23



24



25
−21.7318


26
13.40715


27
−46.732


28
−46.4025


29
−3.35862


30
−17.867


31
11.42766


32
518.9566


33
135.2654


34
−30.4655


35
3.983308


36
−53.0091


37



38
11.95169


39
14.14607


40
136.335


41
340.201


42
6.444143


43
157.6199


44
16.33104


45
11.94411


46
−14.8723


47
182.7292


48



49
−28.4512


50
−14.8


51
13.21417


52
−60.2576


53
90.88165


54
−33.2986


55



56
−7.98255


57
−9.9725


58
250.6208


59
156.3361


60
−31.3953


61



62
70.24134


63
−42.6583


64
19.12132


65
−69.6787


66
149.2876


67
142.29


68
57.24989


69
−47.8475


70
24.95963


71
13.42876


72
−6.254


73
−14.9757


74
−1.8406


75
52.19158


76
324.377


77
−64.9814


78



79
−15.3977


80
−9.70179


81
−37.6604


82
−5.54162


83
−0.07277


84
5.229314


85
97.33434


86
19.43471


87
−17.0866


88
144.1052


89
77.63632


90
−3.20582


91
−71.0315


92
−66.7793
























TABLE 2.2








A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H











1
True values of DFA and SampEn and their percentage














2






DFA(small)















3
Date
File no.
Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Pre
Post


4
May 14, 2019
23
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
2.375477
2.270766


5
May 15, 2019
13
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
2.480475
2.433182


6
May 15, 2019
27
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
2.265233
2.146812


7
May 20, 2019
13
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
2.389863
2.376932


8
May 20, 2019
23
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
2.409517
2.281367


9
May 21, 2019
13
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
2.239034
1.982043


10
May 21, 2019
26
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
2.390247
2.403438


11
Nov. 25, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
2.593867
2.485594


12
Nov. 26, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
2.70446
2.546411


13
Nov. 26, 2019
10
dop
duodenun
100 nM
7
2.596299
2.569456


14
Nov. 27, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
2.675295
2.486405


15
Nov. 28, 2019
1
dop
duodenun
100 nM
7
2.752703
2.542899


16
Nov. 28, 2019
7
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
2.557251
2.437394


17
Apr. 15, 2019
7
dop
duodenun
100 uM
4
2.516845
2.48424


18
Apr. 23, 2019
1
dop
duodenun
100 uM
4
2.333873
2.222587


19
Apr. 23, 2019
11
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
1.942346
1.973908


20
Apr. 23, 2019
21
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
2.303862
2.079284


21
Apr. 24, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
2.244339
2.109334


22
Apr. 24, 2019
14
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
2.206425
2.309379


23
May 2, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
2.163072
1.993088


24
May 2, 2019
14
dop
duodenun
100 uM
4
2.289508
2.242578


25
May 3, 2019
4
dop
duodenun
100 uM
4
2.341756
2.18128


26
Aug. 5, 2019
7
dop
duodenun
 10 uM
5
2.251281
2.18103


27
Aug. 5, 2019
19
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
1.953193
1.900518


28
Aug. 6, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
2.216923
2.115073


29
Aug. 6, 2019
17
dop
duodenun
 10 uM
5
2.232422
2.017462


30
Aug. 15, 2019
1
dop
duodenun
 10 uM
5
2.339852
2.40225


31
Aug. 15, 2019
13
dop
duodenun
 10 uM
5
2.174971
1.803828


32
Aug. 26, 2019
14
dop
duodenun
 10 uM
5
2.235364
2.194831


33
Aug. 12, 2019
7
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
2.236064
2.125898


34
Aug. 12, 2019
18
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
2.284731
2.285666


35
Aug. 13, 2019
4
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
2.277113
2.298803


36
Aug. 13, 2019
17
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
2.734587
2.618149


37
Aug. 14, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
1.870655
1.795451


38
Aug. 14, 2019
14
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
2.512637
2.533317


39
Aug. 26, 2019
1
dop
duodenum
 1 um
6
2.48273
2.183902


40
Nov. 25, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
2.398484
2.312075


41
Nov. 26, 2019
5
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
2.287849
2.157114


42
Nov. 26, 2019
11
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
2.312753
2.23203


43
Nov. 27, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
2.55829
2.454889


44
Nov. 28, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
2.394969
2.3231261


45
Nov. 28, 2019
8
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
2.122513
2.173117


46
Apr. 15, 2019
8
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
2.372357
2.331469


47
Apr. 23, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
2.137868
2.192187


48
Apr. 23, 2019
12
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
2.256948
2.19182


49
Apr. 24, 2019
5
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
2.379063
2.213733


50
Apr. 24, 2019
15
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
2.504558
2.284726


51
May 2, 2019
2
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
2.392191
2.256827


52
May 2, 2019
15
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
2.375075
2.291227


53
Aug. 5, 2019
8
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
2.06631
1.828172


54
Aug. 5, 2019
20
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
1.989387
1.746187


55
Aug. 6, 2019
5
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
1.798989
1.83384


56
Aug. 6, 2019
18
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
2.214779
2.045148


57
Aug. 15, 2019
2
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
2.690534
2.622836


58
Aug. 15, 2019
14
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
2.077315
2.118478


59
Oct. 14, 2019
5
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
2.627464
2.581398


60
Oct. 14, 2019
13
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
2.432251
2.289129


61
Aug. 12, 2019
8
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
1.973491
2.092242


62
Aug. 12, 2019
19
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
2.278646
2.05274


63
Aug. 13, 2019
5
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
2.29267
2.113318


64
Aug. 13, 2019
18
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
2.607369
2.469243


65
Aug. 14, 2019
2
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
2.273746
2.102621


66
Aug. 14, 2019
15
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
2.596701
2.469932


67
Aug. 26, 2019
2
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
2.303953
2.277369


68
Aug. 26, 2019
15
dop
ileum
 1 um
6
2.01874
1.917585


69
Nov. 25, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 nM
7
2.496056
2.358825


70
Nov. 26, 2019
6
dop
colon
100 nM
7
2.33981
2.289689


71
Nov. 26, 2019
12
dop
colon
100 nM
7
2.310353
2.209165


72
Nov. 27, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 nM
7
2.419197
2.262553


73
Nov. 28, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 nM
7
2.323912
2.25464


74
Nov. 28, 2019
9
dop
colon
100 nM
7
2.356429
2.174525


75
Apr. 15, 2019
9
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.395288
2.395899


76
Apr. 23, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.245757
2.18083


77
Apr. 23, 2019
13
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.107773
2.102317


78
Apr. 24, 2019
6
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.412763
2.148345


79
Apr. 24, 2019
16
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.20718
2.13021


80
May 2, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.281605
2.04834


81
May 2, 2019
16
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.252331
2.117861


82
May 3, 2019
3
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.49695
2.427454


83
May 3, 2019
18
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.41524
2.253491


84
May 14, 2019
12
dop
colon
100 uM
4
2.295039
2.068013


85
Aug. 5, 2019
9
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
2.058255
2.117343


86
Aug. 5, 2019
21
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
2.165906
1.925279


87
Aug. 6, 2019
6
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
2.100329
1.950882


88
Aug. 6, 2019
19
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
2.234107
1.967164]


89
Aug. 15, 2019
3
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
2.687172
2.639234


90
Aug. 15, 2019
15
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
2.171826
2.034206


91
Aug. 12, 2019
9
dop
colon
 1 um
6
1.653962
1.536201


92
Aug. 12, 2019
20
dop
colon
 1 um
6
2.275473
2.163102


93
Aug. 13, 2019
6
dop
colon
 1 um
6
2.100363
2.13258


94
Aug. 13, 2019
19
dop
colon
 1 um
6
2.319622
2.246482


95
Aug. 14, 2019
3
dop
colon
 1 um
6
2.70853
2.696801


96
Aug. 14, 2019
16
dop
colon
 1 um
6
2.491164
2.485831


97
Aug. 26, 2019
3
dop
colon
 1 um
6
2.580063
2.437676


98
Aug. 26, 2019
16
dop
colon
 1 um
6
2.290536
2.155816




















I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q











1
e change between pre and post drug treatment










2
IDFAPC(sm DFA(large)
DFAPC(large En(small)
EnPC(small En(large)
















3

Pre
Post

Pre
Post

Pre
Post


4
−4.40797
1.555201
1.447997
−6.89327
0.630284
0.618207
−1.91617
0.226994
0.225094


5
−1.90659
1.950144
1.735804
−10.991
0.558758
0.611933
9.516653
0.347875
0.248886


6
−5.22776
1.684564
1.517283
−9.93023
0.583134
0.613732
5.247173
0.30989
0.290998


7
−0.54107
1.780118
1.79313
0.730959
0.608376
0.578756
−4.86874
0.266003
0.315741


8
−5.3185
1.850171
1.651321
−10.7476
0.561407
0.582799
3.81039
0.322611
0.291461


9
−11.4778
1.644917
1.116494
−32.1246
0.583576
0.60595
3.833906
0.301904
0.206229


10
0.551838
1.785735
1.815448
1.663927
0.581777
0.579189
−0.44495
0.293435
0.302187


11
−4.17418
2.060131
1.869669
−9.24515
0.602843
0.610246
1.228069
0.368136
0.301817


12
−5.84403
2.26328
2.081942
−8.01216
0.506873
0.516922
1.982574
0.393273
0.388466


13
−1.03391
2.098459
2.076489
−1.04697
0.535006
0.517152
−3.33718
0.392925
0.403028


14
−7.06052
2.186056
1.840034
−15.8286
0.591902
0.618988
4.576112
0.408201
0.313264


15
−7.62174
2.208992
1.978747
−10.423
0.53718
0.567051
5.56069
0.3919
0.379347


16
−4.68693
2.175512
2.061139
−5.25727
0.539885
0.555934
2.972725
0.421196
0.41794


17
−1.29549
1.865813
1.841644
−1.29539
0.529242
0.544784
2.936554
0.305199
0.311977


18
−4.76828
1.308061
1.235784
−5.52551
0.570909
0.603086
5.636049
0.169272
0.169761


19
1.624949
0.958044
0.947264
−1.12524
0.595237
0.580169
−2.53148
0.164396
0.154986


20
−9.74791
1.261692
1.103245
−12.5583
0.565337
0.593448
4.972465
0.161681
0.179651


21
−6.01536
1.575035
1.408496
−10.5737
0.574788
0.591112
2.840065
0.297403
0.268122


22
4.666074
1.512726
1.590326
5.129844
0.600778
0.580983
−3.29485
0.262541
0.254313


23
−7.85848
1.223508
0.965885
−21.0561
0.592822
0.567108
−4.3375
0.18722
0.173111


24
−2.04982
1.663851
1.619547
−2.66276
0.608743
0.588601
−3.30869
0.3075
0.321418


25
−6.85281
1.779177
1.531247
−13.9351
0.528122
0.547219
3.616079
0.351819
0.324295


26
−3.12047
1.861237
1.735724
−6.74351
0.565842
0.601795
6.353912
0.403726
0.412489


27
−2.69686
1.46643
1.36351
−7.01836
0.622282
0.625375
0.497066
0.36904
0.34477


28
−4.59418
1.750662
1.699174
−2.94108
0.532511
0.53643
0.735859
0.382722
0.41926


29
−9.62898
1.73069
1.487251
−14.066
0.505985
0.564637
11.59157
0.310047
0.344945


30
2.666766
1.526976
1.62681
6.538005
0.635518
0.630208
−0.83539
0.218012
0.196852


31
−17.0643
1.222035
1.079384
−11.6732
0.601794
0.657933
9.328561
0.200661
0.250489


32
−1.81326
1.220568
1.205609
−1.22553
0.576923
0.596694
3.42713
0.169065
0.160167


33
−4.92681
1.82399
1.57049
−13.8981
0.543609
0.599545
10.28978
0.415484
0.377352


34
0.040959
1.838204
1.868653
1.656454
0.503711
0.5073
0.712626
0.394878
0.390711


35
0.952527
1.76103
1.774633
0.772431
0.493999
0.504415
2.108343
0.333435
0.359044


36
−4.25798
2.325804
2.251181
−3.20847
0.45267
0.466522
3.060045
0.379278
0.387365


37
−4.0202
1.32638
1.142241
−13.8828
0.58778
0.624582
6.261265
0.349187
0.281755


38
0.823045
1.688774
1.609451
−4.69708
0.634683
0.614681
−3.15138
0.185402
0.200723


39
−12.0362
1.444747
1.219606
−15.5835
0.546498
0.562412
2.912008
0.176071
0.177596


40
−3.60264
1.719582
1.542286
−10.3104
0.659386
0.624055
−5.35816
0.255668
0.2025


41
−5.71432
1.650368
1.395267
−15.4572
0.637126
0.636413
−0.11198
0.281224
0.232822


42
−3.49034
1.670554
1.484733
−11.1233
0.639077
0.625624
−2.10511
0.310463
0.247562


43
−4.04182
1.917036
1.733831
−9.5567
0.630653
0.618602
−1.91089
0.280719
0.237322


44
−2.99973
1.839688
1.660837
−9.72178
0.603583
0.611386
1.292669
0.317882
0.3093


45
2.384135
1.434383
1.477117
2.979247
0.648635
0.640727
−1.21914
0.249257
0.268195


46
−1.7235
1.762623
1.786532
1.356479
0.570951
0.549758
−3.71192
0.276536
0.325291


47
2.54078
1.289071
1.200777
−6.84941
0.604211
0.584066
−3.33412
0.227995
0.166506


48
−2.88565
1.346722
1.203287
−10.6507
0.607413
0.584904
−3.70573
0.194241
0.171845


49
−6.9494
1.710763
1.365628
−20.1744
0.590876
0.625057
5.784865
0.247217
0.19228


50
−8.77726
1.933114
1.508481
−21.9662
0.594455
0.612781
3.082775
0.344237
0.239261


51
−5.65858
1.624671
1.35131
−16.8256
0.599994
0.610287
1.715557
0.230423
0.195068


52
−3.53029
1.76734
1.587917
−10.1522
0.586827
0.629541
7.278741
0.286229
0.257945


53
−11.5248
1.621287
1.341665
−17.2469
0.611083
0.599587
−1.88132
0.406119
0.391948


54
−12.2249
1.391843
1.025695
−26.3067
0.63019
0.625709
−0.71097
0.321018
0.278161


55
1.937234
1.20904
1.276923
5.614572
0.60912
0.616475
1.207551
0.341577
0.329867


56
−7.65907
1.820164
1.603908
−11.8811
0.550756
0.628849
14.17931
0.366251
0.393218


57
−2.51618
1.775015
1.740497
−1.94462
0.590411
0.610251
3.360405
0.203225
0.203119


58
1.981524
1.385402
1.51281
9.196502
0.621733
0.582588
−6.29607
0.230152
0.319246


59
−1.75326
2.159032
2.059595
−4.60566
0.564217
0.581071
2.987213
0.389184
0.388773


60
−5.88434
1.880831
1.715058
−8.8138
0.522672
0.576734
10.34344
0.378325
0.345646


61
6.017328
1.59561
1.769628
10.90606
0.548515
0.497484
−9.30351
0.396404
0.417711


62
−9.91404
1.796498
1.571162
−12.5431
0.514729
0.553815
7.593633
0.321801
0.343043


63
−7.82288
1.961493
1.739858
−11.2993
0.506672
0.488954
−3.49705
0.415776
0.403526


64
−5.29753
2.23684
2.170579
−2.96228
0.504566
0.499899
−0.92494
0.392384
0.398007


65
−7.52611
1.758216
1.493034
−15.0825
0.546975
0.568131
3.867757
0.35071
0.334672


66
−4.88193
1.833695
1.695645
−7.52848
0.637435
0.653644
2.542868
0.240702
0.210149


67
−1.15386
1.573427
1.420024
−9.74961
0.670255
0.646627
−3.52513
0.228128
0.184566


68
−5.01081
1.490674
1.237718
−16.9692
0.561628
0.636081
13.25657
0.325305
0.270703


69
−5.49794
1.78072
1.469065
−17.5016
0.593634
0.62418
5.145529
0.241829
0.175392


70
−2.14212
1.896698
1.712262
−9.72406
0.564054
0.620259
9.964431
0.393342
0.34524


71
−4.37977
1.641866
1.448601
−11.7711
0.59593
0.631129
5.906548
0.288437
0.230264


72
−6.47505
1.859477
1.6307
−12.3033
0.618532
0.637981
3.144458
0.346156
0.298192


73
−2.98085
1.810078
1.67453
−7.48856
0.532792
0.563304
5.726664
0.379374
0.36286


74
−7.71946
1.817416
1.521694
−16.2715
0.615956
0.626884
1.774039
0.360215
0.297912


75
0.025501
1.717829
1.728338
0.611763
0.582048
0.57638
−0.97384
0.268617
0.26956


76
−2.8911
1.416343
1.351365
−4.58773
0.565317
0.578455
2.323932
0.21053
0.196323


77
−0.25889
1.296761
1.427783
10.10375
0.601986
0.583226
−3.11633
0.22283
0.273527


78
−10.9592
1.786351
1.414733
−20.8032
0.533796
0.594569
11.38512
0.324098
0.266194


79
−3.48723
1.433383
1.267976
−11.5397
0.604947
0.619089
2.337827
0.225865
0.187214


80
−10.2237
1.58787
1.290369
−18.7359
0.55998
0.581709
3.880315
0.268642
0.260756


81
−5.97027
1.654739
1.332826
−19.454
0.596355
0.604515
1.368303
0.284937
0.220284


82
−2.78322
1.765648
1.797617
1.810576
0.583191
0.573137
−1.72391
0.266234
0.315469


83
−6.69701
1.8921
1.723152
−8.92916
0.554599
0.572114
3.158014
0.352413
0.333891


84
−9.89203
1.747928
1.242084
−28.9397
0.581094
0.618247
6.393548
0.318057
0.237805


85
2.870801
1.539844
1.581635
2.713916
0.608604
0.630316
3.567506
0.351275
0.357745


86
−11.1097
1.733949
1.391893
−19.727
0.600708
0.606792
1.012699
0.40859
0.371477


87
−7.11539
1.687337
1.502383
−10.9613
0.522508
0.565576
8.242471
0.404453
0.399858


88
−11.9485
1.876434
1.572435
−16.2009
0.4681
0.542972
15.99498
0.326245
0.389935


89
−1.78396
1.953314
1.833414
−6.1383
0.614047
0.627676
2.219586
0.240473
0.228318


90
−6.3366
1.600699
1.291865
−19.2937
0.598197
0.626111
4.666407
0.299868
0.226297


91
−7.11992
1.154421
0.943692
−18.2541
0.594627
0.625168
5.136202
0.363526
0.302723


92
−4.93836
1.890245
1.679924
−11.1267
0.487953
0.532206
9.069094
0.361793
0.381468


93
1.533853
1.613414
1.5551
−3.61427
0.540718
0.585713
8.321407
0.375177
0.325876


94
−3.15311
1.910936
1.842728
−3.56937
0.490721
0.516616
5.276998
0.416077
0.41972


95
−0.43304
1.914105
1.851753
−3.25751
0.622295
0.633254
1.761111
0.21702
0.221351


96
−0.2141
1.751625
1.745163
−0.36892
0.635142
0.618864
−2.56287
0.258533
0.230997


97
−5.51875
1.903718
1.705245
−10.4255
0.59253
0.628752
6.113032
0.274934
0.231854


98
−5.88159
1.770428
1.547118
−12.6133
0.560885
0.607588
8.326661
0.360268
0.293246













R
S





1




2
EnPC(large)



3




4
−0.83687



5
−28.4554



6
−6.0963



7
18.69839



8
−9.65576



9
−31.6906



10
2.982644



11
−18.0149



12
−1.22246



13
2.571176



14
−23.2574



15
−3.20313



16
−0.77299



17
2.220542



18
0.289238



19
−5.7242



20
11.11438



21
−9.84555



22
−3.13372



23
−7.536



24
4.526144



25
−7.82347



26
2.170534



27
−6.57652



28
9.546939



29
11.25596



30
−9.70572



31
24.83231



32
−5.26284



33
−9.1778



34
−1.0554



35
7.68032



36
2.132157



37
−19.3112



38
8.26356



39
0.865946



40
−20.7958



41
−17.2112



42
−20.2605



43
−15.4593



44
−2.69973



45
7.597714



46
17.63059



47
−26.9692



48
−11.5301



49
−22.2221



50
−30.4952



51
−15.3436



52
−9.88172



53
−3.48932



54
−13.3504



55
−3.42825



56
7.362848



57
−0.05189



58
38.71093



59
−0.10575



60
−8.63784



61
5.375095



62
6.601074



63
−2.94632



64
1.433143



65
−4.57297



66
−12.6932



67
−19.0952



68
−16.7846



69
−27.4725



70
−12.2292



71
−20.1683



72
−13.8563



73
−4.35298



74
−17.2961



75
0.351069



76
−6.74797



77
22.75172



78
−17.8662



79
−17.1123



80
−2.93538



81
−22.69



82
18.49332



83
−5.25566



84
−25.232



85
1.841865



86
−9.08336



87
−1.1362



88
19.52213



89
−5.05459



90
−24.5344



91
−16.7258



92
5.438235



93
−13.1406



94
3 0.875661



95
1.995919



96
−10.651



97
−15.6691



98
−18.6033
















TABLE 2.3





True mean and standard derivations
























A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H





 1










 2





Mean




 3





DF

AF


 4
Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Repeat No
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
8
7.666209
8.148341
9.847781


 6
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
7
27.07031
24.87305
24.11905


 7
dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
6
29.51212
26.86045
27.42705


 8
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
9
29.27489
29.23147
26.25349


 9
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
5
28.58724
26.33727
25.10932


10
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
7
26.26127
23.02576
23.47332


11
dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
25.88698
25.55086
24.9937


12
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
6
28.77163
25.72417
26.34074


13
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
6
27.93899
27.60417
24.31959


14
dop
colon
100 nM
7
7
27.34375
26.64074
23.90141


15
dop
colon
 1 uM
6
6
30.47712
31.59389
27.28081


16
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
9
29.57148
30.27008
27.92117


17
dop
colon
100 uM
4
6
28.13151
27.4249
25.36122



















I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P





 1










 2










 3

B

N

T

DP


 4
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
11.76131
8.417049
15.41579
55.10807
23.60213
36.06583
60.19476
887.9864


 6
20.8544
35.6991
87.17686
46.11872
4.816448
12.55019
2.10117
815.9348


 7
25.61283
25.77922
53.73974
50.57929
24.47956
22.2992
20.70276
989.7395


 8
25.37742
31.52292
56.61996
52.3777
7.826552
14.71837
34.2519
413.7344


 9
22.17471
43.26263
68.6098
43.84373
24.99279
11.03182
5.355146
1060.834


10
19.39921
31.75341
60.02687
51.19428
14.6291
10.68732
20.00247
780.4363


11
24.07385
27.46361
46.262
40.48774
15.4824
30.86594
36.65598
1070.487


12
22.71846
32.81144
63.28993
50.93642
9.238937
14.9062
26.12427
1446.493


13
24.20774
41.48996
48.79936
45.25801
25.04798
12.35393
24.94581
905.118


14
23.27551
39.4134
48.4393
48.73078
22.61754
10.03965
27.64482
1910.972


15
29.56971
37.46321
28.32211
41.36778
14.48689
18.34704
55.48241
1762.519


16
29.18974
26.98496
25.81677
42.41536
13.0931
29.51525
58.33748
2590.054


17
24.02206
34.72524
53.92999
53.13977
33.46859
11.40005
11.68702
2431.289






Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X





 1










 2










 3

PPAmp

Slope

Period

Velocity


 4
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
253.1927
162.6938
126.8881
119.2443
104.0708
7.452247
7.66696
10.60811


 6
382.2264
193.0043
114.1422
321.7088
166.8509
2.518156
3.270707
12.54962


 7
427.3125
187.3769
130.4728
327.3237
206.461
2.264239
2.766869
12.45968


 8
137.826
117.5765
97.38451
202.3646
153.8872
3.010336
3.630872
17.77473


 9
388.5566
199.338
121.0515
322.2333
182.5209
2.441572
3.256181
11.83095


10
177.5254
165.1927
119.2081
257.5321
160.0611
2.662801
3.732104
10.47592


11
460.2607
187.0543
138.0307
300.8899
204.3844
2.530279
3.095015
16.77924


12
760.18
229.563
149.0748
383.6991
238.1939
2.302001
3.048012
17.72554


13
400.7727
183.8137
136.8231
280.5297
197.0423
2.485303
2.712049
6.724907


14
1415.886
230.8942
208.944
357.113
329.5393
2.328841
2.638358
13.57336


15
2203.399
251.9418
233.8342
429.1537
400.5277
2.052601
1.996225
20.583


16
3178.673
278.1256
223.7033
479.9934
389.8203
2.099196
2.288157
13.68932


17
1069.016
267.2952
199.744
439.2788
298.9748
2.248496
2.480643
10.28267






Y
Z
AA
AB
AC
AD
AE
AF





 1










 2










 3

DFA(small)

DFA(large)

En(small)

En(large)


 4
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
7.863222
2.364264
2.270649
1.750121
1.582497
0.586759
0.598652
0.29553


 6
8.476182
2.646646
2.51136
2.165405
1.98467
0.552282
0.564382
0.395939


 7
13.1999
2.342645
2.263027
1.744133
1.633751
0.537564
0.554208
0.3191051


 8
14.22238
2.200572
2.087856
1.5398
1.45678
0.577265
0.601867
0.293325


 9
11.07672
2.260225
2.177297
1.460879
1.360382
0.573998
0.57739
0.245226


10
21.4056
2.34581
2.275392
1.705269
1.549012
0.63641
0.626134
0.282536


11
27.72514
2.293164
2.186881
1.780806
1.637206
0.561347
0.568079
0.333901


12
16.32354
2.237129
2.133148
1.655327
1.534519
0.587523
0.602658
0.329481


13
6.264069
2.345437
2.251713
1.633472
1.429133
0.593532
0.599485
0.258126


14
18.01225
2.374293
2.258233
1.801043
1.576142
0.586817
0.61729
0.334892


15
12.0894
2.302464
2.231811
1.738612
1.60884
0.565609
0.59352
0.328416


16
12.55933
2.236266
2.105685
1.73193
1.528937
0.568694
0.599907
0.338484


17
7.657876
2.310993
2.187276
1.629895
1.457624
0.576331
0.590144
0.274222






AG
AH
AI
AJ
AK
AL
AM
AN





 1










 2



SD

















 3
No. of Pattern
DF

AF

B















 4
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
0.268657
4.25
5.25
1.246386
1.796788
0.886723
1.503159
8.814569


 6
0.36731
6.6
6.2
2.246519
1.244685
1.951554
0.743646
10.30748


 7
0.310649
6.166667
6.833333
2.858614
8.347153
4.388634
6.27373
12.34336


 8
0.304139
5.857143
6.428571
1.974787
5.293136
3.403889
4.102591
14.23534


 9
0.239737
6
6.4
4.105791
5.190629
3.686442
5.418081
11.58547


10
0.249617
6.6
6
3.2165
7.140039
3.010187
3.605719
11.7358


11
0.320297
6.285714
7
6.811515
8.837247
5.016491
4.941626
7.847156


12
0.331247
6.25
6.875
3.171016
5.98698
3.35513
4.301762
12.90536


13
0.221171
6.333333
6
1.385982
3.20614
1.616205
3.135401
8.890236


14
0.284977
5.6
6.2
2.739949
1.523009
2.440634
1.561005
12.6085


15
0.300904
5.428571
6.428571
3.94223
3.131414
5.246546
3.68319
14.94392


16
0.328938
6
6.8
2.179115
6.337592
4.338948
5.765392
15.56547


17
0.256102
6
6
1.491106
1.615037
2.01387
2.090824
9.082381






AO
AP
AQ
AR
AS
AT
AU
AV





 1










 2










 3

N

T

DP

PPAmp


 4
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
12.85519
7.150139
13.1418
12.77476
15.37677
691.5369
416.1357
51.54097


 6
7.717109
11.15991
4.610922
5.699737
0.678554
511.7694
241.7115
54.94503


 7
26.59627
16.16153
17.05453
15.3143
26.23043
777.2335
242.8829
57.6751


 8
34.45836
14.68734
6.415646
13.72937
30.11574
391.4272
124.9463
24.20744


 9
28.99872
9.649683
27.53768
5.23054
4.856233
1068.995
363.143
60.50537


10
25.99388
5.565017
16.89323
8.781134
22.86379
276.8679
83.04047
20.50846


11
22.68142
10.7719
11.75371
11.79988
29.68901
745.0875
296.9765
76.94858


12
28.47327
9.805598
10.91488
7.31322
29.81622
1368.234
623.5598
115.9093


13
13.80326
10.4843
14.41483
3.802777
21.2692
909.5176
354.4524
67.56446


14
32.90603
14.68621
22.64546
5.03226
34.30716
2034.571
2421.565
85.63749


15
24.40735
9.569504
18.12787
12.64545
34.75676
1941.012
2229.239
109.5894


16
30.23675
6.875124
17.40244
18.01958
31.76622
3571.094
6174.521
126.1738


17
26.82664
8.068495
23.34169
10.55194
12.99555
2118.499
690.4111
80.90805






AW
AX
AY
AZ
BA
BB
BC
BD





 1










 2










 3

Slope

Period

Velocity

DFA(small)


 4
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
56.24314
37.84681
36.62551
0.654939
0.972795
12.40686
6.747541
0.084161


 6
37.65019
95.49879
57.73372
0.212831
0.47092
7.038413
4.318973
0.075793


 7
22.1352
98.04194
33.41138
0.244024
0.804897
16.81004
9.939141
0.272006


 8
13.69744
50.56903
47.74121
0.87138
1.624232
10.71144
8.21397
0.11994


 9
27.30013
108.6049
61.73344
0.715875
1.288476
20.08436
14.42521
0.155852


10
19.97053
59.79322
41.95114
0.396504
1.049011
3.114373
11.93892
0.144674


11
66.23917
117.4847
91.92218
0.504512
0.73849
13.82808
40.21133
0.229615


12
56.67104
185.7691
95.6629
0.180441
0.679422
10.09134
9.727716
0.317259


13
32.30968
111.9528
58.08007
0.427331
0.854037
8.210103
7.204446
0.1163


14
128.1597
134.0056
188.4703
0.1888
0.493319
5.199237
12.85374
0.070679


15
114.6535
174.8819
189.6278
0.172286
0.128412
36.40332
11.25197
0.325164


16
162.6866
189.3884
282.9499
0.314344
0.622639
4.43656
5.663909
0.229168


17
48.82833
124.2854
76.45891
0.240079
0.427954
12.18542
5.831211
0.117284






BE
BF
BG
BH
BI
BJ
BK
BL





 1










 2










 3

DFA(large)

En(small)

En(large)

No. of Pat text missing or illegible when filed


 4
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre





 5
0.160255
0.132631
0.247108
0.025287
0.017633
0.039357
0.041925
0.957427


 6
0.049711
0.074259
0.107629
0.037063
0.043925
0.017854
0.048253
1.140175


 7
0.272229
0.321731
0.381649
0.060993
0.06205
0.098401
0.09102
0.983192


 8
0.20018
0.255818
0.251865
0.046968
0.041219
0.096516
0.102815
0.690066


 9
0.161056
0.294623
0.314464
0.029417
0.020408
0.074587
0.070876
0.707107


10
0.111511
0.16776
0.126211
0.018951
0.010931
0.027798
0.036235
0.547723


11
0.200006
0.240728
0.279765
0.061422
0.06991
0.070109
0.089598
0.755929


12
0.339189
0.313661
0.320371
0.038025
0.020758
0.074834
0.065925
0.707107


13
0.054178
0.234973
0.213106
0.012324
0.028207
0.049023
0.056947
0.816497


14
0.064116
0.087937
0.111249
0.032928
0.027139
0.058279
0.070769
1.516575


15
0.343834
0.258811
0.291734
0.055928
0.04535
0.06906
0.072974
0.9759


16
0.270414
0.158747
0.186046
0.059661
0.037014
0.064308
0.080061
0.707107


17
0.131644
0.191748
0.210655
0.022732
0.017991
0.046905
0.047282
0.755929






BM












 1










 2










 3
ern









 4
Post









 5
0.957427









 6
0.447214









 7
0.983192









 8
0.534522









 9
0.547723









10
1.224745









11
0.816497









12
0.991031









13
0.632456









14
1.30384









15
1.133893









16
1.095445









17
1.511858






text missing or illegible when filed indicates data missing or illegible when filed














TABLE 2.4





Mean and SD of percentage change

























A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I





 1






















 2





Mean percentage change (%)
















 3
Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Repeat No
DF
AF
B
N





 4
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
7
8.128967
20.31495
6.99874
−31.5059


 5
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
−7.88968
−13.1377
51.47776
−41.3023


 6
dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
7
−9.672
−7.64033
27.96052
−26.0997


 7
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
6
−0.5559
−2.19283
25.09703
−44.5512


 8
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
9
−8.1457
−12.2047
25.34717
−18.8509


 9
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
6
−11.7835
−17.1055
28.27346
−36.5652


10
dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
−4.66192
−3.60009
18.79839
−25.0053


11
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
7
−8.69716
−13.5311
30.47849
−41.6975


12
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
6
−1.09503
−0.31435
7.309394
−20.21


13
dop
colon
100 nM
7
6
−2.04655
−1.79584
9.025904
−26.1132


14
dop
colon
 1 uM
6
8
4.099977
10.44317
−9.14111
−26.8809


15
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
6
2.595162
4.979046
−1.16819
−29.3223


16
dop
colon
100 uM
4
9
−2.42503
−5.17544
19.20475
−19.6712




















J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R





 1











 2











 3
T
DP
PPAmp
Slope
Period
Velocity
DFA(small)
DFA(large)
En(small)





 4
24.12893
−56.9927
−18.024
−8.21673
3.689298
22.02304
−4.04683
−9.75598
2.168323


 5
−10.449
−35.0124
−41.2486
−48.3407
30.3723
−17.6174
−5.07022
−8.3022
2.163832


 6
−1.59644
−34.2125
−25.3293
−31.5121
21.02539
97.69308
−3.34639
−6.9773
3.170384


 7
19.53353
−47.4107
−14.3002
−19.1294
31.95505
−20.4475
−5.17875
−5.30424
4.442673


 8
−5.67668
−21.1387
−36.4653
−41.4951
31.81639
81.34962
−3.58857
−7.06691
0.72541


 9
9.315152
−77.9782
−28.0296
−37.5146
39.0588
111.1163
−2.91079
−8.86503
−1.56877


10
5.790041
−51.3141
−26.3207
−31.675
22.51592
65.52867
−4.44873
−8.15354
1.251276


11
11.21807
−21.5663
−30.0807
−33.6255
32.70938
−2.0405
−4.70547
−6.99847
2.898694


12
12.59188
12.06158
−20.8458
−25.7936
9.776357
33.53616
−3.85484
−12.1803
1.015738


13
17.60517
13.91164
−5.825
2.881199
13.59551
41.7371
−4.86586
−12.51
5.276945


14
37.13537
13.74634
−8.36309
−8.21794
−2.41291
22.55092
−3.21563
−7.90371
5.180204


15
28.82225
−25.6601
−23.7383
−22.9821
8.782035
−10.5241
−5.9039
−11.6012
5.950608


16
0.286971
−31.7486
−23.4385
−31.1053
10.63735
40.86316
−5.31371
−10.0463
2.5032981






S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
AA





 1























 2


SD percentage change




















 3
En(large)
ActP
DF
AF
B
N
T
DP
PPAmp





 4
−7.86484
19.45
26.26159
19.39606
7.824624
16.26674
17.42516
57.09071
40.935


 5
−7.31661
11.96
4.021961
6.933814
4.192089
10.41251
5.626532
47.48587
7.861639


 6
−1.51463
11.35
25.13922
10.27668
25.69461
29.74949
22.34331
46.56287
23.13059


 7
3.751525
14.61429
14.26834
18.65488
39.47316
18.43169
20.86462
48.85024
20.87482


 8
−1.76807
11.68
10.55228
12.29901
30.50501
27.59579
7.350898
141.1962
18.98083


 9
−11.4715
5.88
28.99624
14.14942
18.20473
15.61097
14.74401
4.996288
6.929485


10
−5.33538
13.32857
17.15903
5.683626
17.21165
13.47704
27.44219
17.69718
12.32416


11
2.126289
8.375
24.66621
13.80947
25.2055
7.595621
30.49392
97.72505
16.83827


12
−14.1159
8.8
11.6118
12.56933
21.25927
20.77215
22.81168
186.8873
22.76359


13
−15.8959
19.6
7.508601
11.82407
35.49789
33.21273
36.9336
137.3658
45.88399


14
−8.31001
16.45714
6.01572
16.79101
26.71444
21.52806
31.44938
85.28964
16.7506


15
−3.07409
8.96
21.02257
17.11654
25.13421
18.77098
29.3703
68.82866
25.32645


16
−5.62434
11.2875
5.033787
5.683459
23.9697
22.2896
17.93054
71.93298
13.08632



















AB
AC
AD
AE
AF
AG
AH
AI





 1










 2










 3
Slope
Period
Velocity
DFA(small
DFA(large)
En(small)
En(large)
ActP





 4
35.95585
16.30484
105.3829
4.0079
11.19137
4.864503
17.6571
4.810059


 5
8.994522
18.78484
50.10624
2.379576
4.980522
3.136293
10.61327
12.60488


 6
25.55933
27.22803
216.441
4.594116
7.34454
4.231854
9.787561
5.11576


 7
34.97704
73.68006
23.71082
6.386011
6.889621
4.775442
12.28703
7.464455


 8
19.7191
28.84447
109.5171
4.704409
8.096829
4.008516
6.877634
6.108764


 9
11.72818
27.90511
130.7452
2.756726
6.199121
2.244841
11.4334
4.578428


10
13.14282
18.41824
117.7509
4.961903
8.84829
7.115043
9.88398
7.994939


11
20.31301
29.38597
51.82981
5.548586
11.69619
6.613618
16.0061
4.947943


12
19.06595
28.70816
85.44971
3.731649
8.158478
4.660051
15.98521
7.038466


13
62.64031
20.8974
92.59481
2.113782
3.811308
2.807358
7.811232
21.06264


14
17.59326
6.844384
77.81314
3.160843
6.113264
3.917319
9.55699
7.226769


15
31.85314
20.64228
15.11973
5.643804
8.735398
5.509515
14.4159
5.206054


16
9.632743
18.10985
119.4503
4.068197
12.15713
4.206257
16.29155
7.871547
















TABLE 2.5





p-values using paired t-test using mean of each slow wav text missing or illegible when filed
























A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H





 1










 2
Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
n
DF
AF
B





 3
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
7
0.546939
0.02628
0.055787


 4
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
0.021174
0.021182
1.05E−05


 5
dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
7
0.351322
0.105884
0.028092


 6
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
6
0.980343
0.667897
0.180112


 7
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
9
0.049079
0.028582
0.037361


 8
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
6
0.331316
0.034552
0.012574


 9
dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
0.761093
0.155367
0.027706


10
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
7
0.364818
0.051336
0.018618


11
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
6
0.809235
0.93059
0.438099


12
dop
colon
100 nM
7
6
0.467934
0.61206
0.560704


13
dop
colon
 1 uM
6
8
0.147196
0.092618
0.365372


14
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
6
0.79703
0.490439
0.913789


15
dop
colon
100 uM
4
9
0.180925
0.020294
0.042933


16





17
Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
n
DF
AF
B





18
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
7
ns
*
ns


19
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
*
*
****


20
dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
7
ns
ns
*


21
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
6
ns
ns
ns


22
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
9
*
*
*


23
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
6
ns
*
*


24
dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
ns
ns
*


25
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
7
ns
ns
*


26
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
6
ns
ns
ns


27
dop
colon
100 nM
7
6
ns
ns
ns


28
dop
colon
 1 uM
6
8
ns
ns
ns


29
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
6
ns
ns
ns


30
dop
colon
100 uM
4
9
ns
*
*






I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P











 1

text missing or illegible when filed  e features between baseline and post-drug data
















 2
N
T
DP
Amp
S
P
V
DFA(small)





 3
0.002169
0.010534
0.033191
0.181696
0.354502
0.672369
0.355113
0.03331


 4
0.000892
0.01423
0.101034
0.00163
0.003187
0.024016
0.34939
0.003989


 5
0.059354
0.856294
0.071478
0.01666
0.013854
0.089787
0.911403
0.112629


 6
0.001959
0.070366
0.078602
0.099783
0.135798
0.512522
0.1271
0.0782


 7
0.074586
0.04917
0.112981
0.00224
0.002237
0.010584
0.79997
0.04573


 8
0.002253
0.182402
0.000743
0.000179
0.001939
0.022362
0.058228
0.040529


 9
0.002687
0.596887
0.021401
0.009316
0.007898
0.027559
0.459724
0.027601


10
6.68E−06
0.367986
0.117095
0.020662
0.016144
0.02511
0.657371
0.034431


11
0.062915
0.234282
0.110588
0.106071
0.071034
0.523728
0.556643
0.032799


12
0.112079
0.295613
0.541276
0.60967
0.755909
0.184179
0.419499
0.00264


13
0.009576
0.012423
0.260585
0.280938
0.289005
0.306746
0.397612
0.020595


14
0.012293
0.061333
0.611936
0.171809
0.274537
0.39723
0.193907
0.046492


15
0.029366
0.962882
0.067402
0.006155
0.00043
0.116932
0.419768
0.002688


16













17
N
T
DP
Amp
S
P
V
DFA(small)





18
**
*
*
ns
ns
ns
ns
*


19
***
*
ns
**
**
*
ns
**


20
ns
ns
ns
*
*
ns
ns
ns


21
**
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns


22
ns
*
ns
**
**
*
ns
*


23
**
ns
***
***
**
*
ns
*


24
**
ns
*
**
**
*
ns
*


25
****
ns
ns
*
*
*
ns
*


26
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
*


27
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
**


28
**
*
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
*


29
*
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
*


30
*
ns
ns
**
***
ns
ns
**


















Q
R
S
T
U
V
W





 1









 2
DFA(large)
En(small)
En(large)
NoP





 3
0.05486
0.306732
0.239327
0





 4
0.009738
0.145475
0.155234
0.476621





 5
0.041452
0.11854
0.521299
0.025031





 6
0.089212
0.046987
0.377447
0.03002





 7
0.029339
0.671587
0.356144
0.177808





 8
0.013212
0.145173
0.050319
0.426317





 9
0.026237
0.644379
0.218658
0.046528





10
0.083975
0.285725
0.906923
0.049174





11
0.012798
0.588098
0.082111
0.363217





12
0.000467
0.004705
0.001048
0.070484





13
0.004377
0.007923
0.050199
0.00376





14
0.01957
0.027587
0.631766
0.01613





15
0.024597
0.093112
0.229564
1





16












17
DFA(large)
En(small)
En(large)
NoP








18
ns
ns
ns
****





19
**
ns
ns
ns





20
*
ns
ns
*





21
*
*
ns
*





22
*
ns
ns
ns





23
*
ns
ns
ns





24
*
ns
ns
*





25
ns
ns
ns
*





26
*
ns
ns
ns

p > 0.05
ns


27
***
**
**
ns

p < 0.05
*


28
**
**
ns
**

p < 0.01
**


29
*
*
ns
*

p < 0.001
***


30
*
ns
ns
ns

p < 0.0001
****






text missing or illegible when filed indicates data missing or illegible when filed














TABLE 2.6





Percentage of activation pattern distrib text missing or illegible when filed
























A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H





 1










 2




1st


2nd


 3
Drug
Tissue
Dose
Repeat No
mean
sd
n
mean





 4
dop
stomach
Baseline
4
38.35
14.10969
4
22.6


 5
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
30.6
17.80468
4
16.7


 6
dop
duodenum
Baseline
7
32.26
11.80458
5
23.3


 7
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
11.1
13.03438
5
8.4


 8
dop
duodenum
Baseline
6
33.05
13.41682
6
20.41667


 9
dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
12.76667
9.446834
6
18.78333


10
dop
duodenum
Baseline
5
33.72857
13.07781
7
20.31429


11
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
19.62857
9.165827
7
17.94286


12
dop
duodenum
Baseline
4
29.32
5.496544
5
20.74


13
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
6.96
7.049326
5
7.44


14
dop
ileum
Baseline
7
32.82
5.679084
5
21.46


15
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
3.8
4.500556
5
2.56


16
dop
ileum
Baseline
6
35.2
6.015258
7
25.54286


17
dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
13.01429
6.707317
7
16.02857


18
dop
ileum
Baseline
5
35.7
8.411047
8
19.95


19
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
19.1625
16.36127
8
14.0375


20
dop
ileum
Baseline
4
27.61667
4.064193
6
23.46667


21
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
9.4
9.525965
6
5.683333


22
dop
colon
Baseline
7
31.28
9.104779
5
25.52


23
dop
colon
100 nM
7
13.44
7.345951
5
22.44


24
dop
colon
Baseline
6
25.81429
7.864356
7
17.7


25
dop
colon
 1 uM
6
29.78571
21.62741
7
20.18571


26
dop
colon
Baseline
5
36.24
18.27192
5
15.98


27
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
26.5
24.44831
5
17.7


28
dop
colon
Baseline
4
34.4
3.668398
8
25.3375


29
dop
colon
100 uM
4
11.3875
12.94366
8
14.3375


30










31










32






I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P











 1

text missing or illegible when filed  ution based on baseline data
















 2


3rd


Other




 3
sd
n
mean
sd
n
mean
sd
n





 4
7.779889
4
10.225
5.62161
4
28.825
6.601704
4


 5
5.665686
4
27.225
9.265483
4
25.475
17.66586
4


 6
5.724945
5
13.7
1.936492
5
30.74
15.2487
5


 7
11.17989
5
10.2
9.957911
5
70.3
24.7876
5


 8
3.825398
6
15.28333
7.776224
6
31.25
14.01824
6


 9
13.15955
6
17.15
8.551667
6
51.3
15.2364
6


10
5.329925
7
11.35714
3.968567
7
34.6
14.28822
7


11
13.49974
7
16.01429
6.998435
7
46.41429
12.10722
7


12
5.430285
5
15.16
2.111398
5
34.78
11.78121
5


13
4.099756
5
5.88
3.585666
5
79.72
12.96831
5


14
1.740115
5
17.22
4.75731
5
28.5
2.774887
5


15
1.596246
5
2.2
2.614383
5
91.44
8.324842
5


16
5.060915
7
14.47143
5.609431
7
24.78571
6.981267
7


17
13.86311
7
13.27143
9.170917
7
57.68571
18.82449
7


18
7.931132
8
13.7625
5.58747
8
30.5875
9.468359
8


19
11.1291
8
16.5375
14.39255
8
50.2625
23.31039
8


20
2.770319
6
19.05
2.771823
6
29.86667
7.115242
6


21
5.087403
6
5.866667
6.586856
6
79.05
20.62947
6


22
9.723014
5
15.36
6.510991
5
27.84
16.64476
5


23
27.348
5
9.18
6.226315
5
54.94
30.68832
5


24
2.863564
7
13.48571
3.668073
7
43
12.35867
7


25
11.66554
7
17.32857
8.311581
7
32.7
21.53617
7


26
6.276305
5
9.92
5.31432
5
37.86
11.25291
5


27
12.1918
5
13.52
7.968814
5
42.28
22.53746
5


28
4.987681
8
18.275
4.076325
8
21.9875
9.821614
8


29
16.07873
8
14.35
14.10906
8
59.925
33.53164
8


30










31










32






Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X





 1






















 2






P-values















 3

Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Repeat No
1st
2nd





 4

dop
stomach
100 uM
4
4
0.249079
0.172625


 5

dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
0.002134
0.023244


 6

dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
6
0.054219
0.810914


 7

dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
7
0.046071
0.684683


 8

dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
5
0.008876
0.030922


 9

dop
ileum
100 nM
7
5
0.001043
3.31E−05


10

dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
0.00016
0.103121


11

dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
8
0.029534
0.300338


12

dop
ileum
100 uM
4
6
0.003408
0.000549


13

dop
colon
100 nM
7
5
0.019009
0.739025


14

dop
colon
 1 uM
6
7
0.518363
0.608652


15

dop
colon
 10 uM
5
5
0.082449
0.798552


16

dop
colon
100 uM
4
8
0.001843
0.081556


17

























18






P-values















19

Drug
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Repeat No
1st
2nd





20

dop
stomach
100 uM
4
4
ns
ns


21

dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
**
*


22

dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
6
ns
ns


23

dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
7
*
ns


24

dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
5
**
*


25

dop
ileum
100 nM
7
5
**
****


26

dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
***
ns


27

dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
8
*
ns


28

dop
ileum
100 uM
4
6
**
***


29

dop
colon
100 nM
7
5
*
ns


30

dop
colon
 1 uM
6
7
ns
ns


31

dop
colon
 10 uM
5
5
ns
ns


32

dop
colon
100 uM
4
8
**
ns
















Y
Z
AA
AB
AC





 1







 2







 3
3rd
Other





 4
0.062244
0.7695





 5
0.512983
0.015095





 6
0.505499
0.108136





 7
0.175317
0.25529





 8
0.016345
0.012734





 9
0.000756
1.63E−05





10
0.753257
0.002915





11
0.635381
0.077567





12
0.001127
0.001019





13
0.081291
0.081031





14
0.23183
0.144967





15
0.385834
0.669597





16
0.360213
0.010722





17







18





19
3rd
Other








20
ns
ns





21
ns
*





22
ns
ns





23
ns
ns





24
*
*





25
***
****





26
ns
**





27
ns
ns





28
**
**

p > 0.05
ns


29
ns
ns

p < 0.05
*


30
ns
ns

p < 0.01
**


31
ns
ns

p < 0.001
***


32
ns
*

p < 0.0001
****






text missing or illegible when filed indicates data missing or illegible when filed














TABLE 2.7





Percentage of activation pattern distributio text missing or illegible when filed

























A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I





 1























 2




1st

2nd
















 3




mean
sd
n
mean
sd





 4
dop
stomach
Baseline
4
30.275
21.08671
4
13.65
11.13508


 5
dop
stomach
100 uM
4
36.325
11.92766
4
24.8
8.968463


 6
dop
duodenum
Baseline
7
24.5
15.66652
5
12.3
7.475627


 7
dop
duodenum
100 nM
7
17.12
13.74962
5
11.22
8.790734


 8
dop
duodenum
Baseline
6
15.45
10.29811
6
20.83333
18.99028


 9
dop
duodenum
 1 uM
6
36.95
18.30418
6
17.25
5.807151


10
dop
duodenum
Baseline
5
22.54286
15.00587
7
13.67143
8.086968


11
dop
duodenum
 10 uM
5
32.22857
10.9608
7
23.92857
5.287947


12
dop
duodenum
Baseline
4
17.82
12.05268
5
15.96
5.77434


13
dop
duodenum
100 uM
4
15.74
12.87296
5
10.94
7.91189


14
dop
ileum
Baseline
7
15.3
12.48779
5
15.56
10.33625


15
dop
ileum
100 nM
7
6.76
4.657038
5
4.22
4.185929


16
dop
ileum
Baseline
6
8.871429
8.981966
7
20.04286
10.12881


17
dop
ileum
 1 uM
6
31.44286
13.73643
7
19.47143
7.311569


18
dop
ileum
Baseline
5
17.2
11.49621
8
15.6375
13.98131


19
dop
ileum
 10 uM
5
32.325
13.16551
8
20.7375
6.40601


20
dop
ileum
Baseline
4
23.3
10.50505
6
17.43333
7.639284


21
dop
ileum
100 uM
4
11.31667
8.608929
6
7.85
7.007068


22
dop
colon
Baseline
7
20.06
13.73619
5
23.4
14.61865


23
dop
colon
100 nM
7
26.96
24.73041
5
14.74
7.633348


24
dop
colon
Baseline
6
19.07143
12.19354
7
17.55714
3.070753


25
dop
colon
 1 uM
6
39.57143
15.61695
7
22.08571
5.456931


26
dop
colon
Baseline
5
30.2
22.36716
5
10.18
9.054943


27
dop
colon
 10 uM
5
33.4
21.85921
5
18.54
2.341581


28
dop
colon
Baseline
4
20.35
9.562576
8
21.6625
14.31053


29
dop
colon
100 uM
4
21.4625
15.75427
8
18.0125
14.06154


30











31











32






J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R











 1

text missing or illegible when filed  n based on post-drug data

















 2

3rd


Other






 3
n
mean
sd
n
mean
sd
n

Drug





 4
4
24.675
9.564997
4
31.4
9.25887
4

dop


 5
4
16.85
4.597463
4
22.025
13.45297
4

dop


 6
5
10.04
11.63972
5
53.16
11.36257
5

dop


 7
5
7.98
6.422383
5
63.68
26.83816
5

dop


 8
6
13
9.027292
6
50.71667
9.774951
6

dop


 9
6
12.83333
4.782747
6
32.96667
12.20486
6

dop


10
7
15.48571
20.64836
7
48.3
12.93342
7

dop


11
7
14.41429
3.257519
7
29.42857
13.27877
7

dop


12
5
20.04
6.312923
5
46.18
16.46123
5

dop


13
5
7.22
4.178157
5
66.1
24.70739
5

dop


14
5
16.84
6.636867
5
52.3
16.30583
5

dop


15
5
2.98
2.559687
5
86.04
10.93929
5

dop


16
7
24.98571
15.07552
7
46.1
12.88966
7

dop


17
7
13.17143
3.554675
7
35.91429
20.22279
7




18
8
12.2
13.30725
8
54.9625
17.48542
8

Drug


19
8
12.7625
5.002553
8
34.175
17.87047
8




20
6
17.75
7.385594
6
41.51667
7.664311
6

dop


21
6
6.766667
6.116753
6
74.06667
21.01111
6

dop


22
5
14.2
12.506
5
42.34
20.29773
5

dop


23
5
11.92
7.566836
5
46.38
32.74572
5

dop


24
7
13.45714
8.69269
7
49.91429
14.16032
7

dop


25
7
14.4
3.171225
7
23.94286
12.78943


dop


26
5
7.9
6.0469
5
51.72
24.63518
5

dop


27
5
13.86
6.098606
5
34.2
20.25734
5

dop


28
8
20.3
10.78663
8
37.6875
19.61315
8

dop


29
8
7.475
5.830401
8
53.05
32.58606
8

dop


30








dop


31








dop


32








dop






S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
AA





 1























 2




P-values


















 3
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Repeat No
1st
2nd
3rd
Other






 4
stomach
100 uM
4
4
0.343533
0.265717
0.220861
0.362481



 5
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
0.111337
0.86037
0.806166
0.529939



 6
duodenum
 1 uM
6
6
0.102748
0.717753
0.956698
0.004598



 7
duodenum
 10 uM
5
7
0.322739
0.037619
0.894758
0.036909



 8
duodenum
100 uM
4
5
0.844608
0.201568
0.043767
0.287598



 9
ileum
100 nM
7
5
0.280785
0.034291
0.005958
0.008145



10
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
0.003247
0.899983
0.058657
0.084268



11
ileum
 10 uM
5
8
0.015832
0.343704
0.878453
0.030297



12
ileum
100 uM
4
6
0.065058
0.148239
0.025431
0.013724



13
colon
100 nM
7
5
0.320799
0.256631
0.765864
0.773748



14
colon
 1 uM
6
7
8.6E−05
0.116466
0.766714
7.82E−05



15
colon
 10 uM
5
5
0.665868
0.157214
0.231409
0.279054



16
colon
100 uM
4
8
0.818439
0.625241
0.030278
0.191407



17


























18




P-values


















19
Tissue
Dose
Dose
Repeat No
1st
2nd
3rd
Other






20
stomach
100 uM
4
4
ns
ns
ns
ns



21
duodenum
100 nM
7
5
ns
ns
ns
ns



22
duodenum
 1 uM
6
6
ns
ns
ns
**



23
duodenum
 10 uM
5
7
ns
*
ns
*



24
duodenum
100 uM
4
5
ns
ns
*
ns



25
ileum
100 nM
7
5
ns
*
**
**



26
ileum
 1 uM
6
7
**
ns
ns
ns



27
ileum
 10 uM
5
8
*
ns
ns
*



28
ileum
100 uM
4
6
ns
ns
*
*



29
colon
100 nM
7
5
ns
ns
ns
ns



30
colon
 1 uM
6
7
****
ns
ns
****



31
colon
 10 uM
5
5
ns
ns
ns
ns



32
colon
100 uM
4
8
ns
ns
*
ns













AB
AC





 1




 2




 3




 4




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25




26




27




28
p > 0.05
ns


29
p < 0.05
*


30
p < 0.01
**


31
p < 0.001
***


32
p < 0.0001
****






text missing or illegible when filed indicates data missing or illegible when filed












REFERENCES



  • [1] M. Y. Lee, S. E. Ha, C. Park, P. J. Park, R. Fuchs, L. Wei, B. G. Jorgensen, D. Redelman, S. M. Ward, K. M. Sanders, S. Ro, Transcriptome of interstitial cells of Cajal reveals unique and selective gene signatures, PLoS One. 12 (2017) 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176031.

  • [2] M. Y. Lee, C. Park, R. M. Berent, P. J. Park, R. Fuchs, H. Syn, A. Chin, J. Townsend, C. C. Benson, D. Redelman, T. Shen, J. K. Park, J. M. Miano, K. M. Sanders, S. Ro, Smooth muscle cell genome browser: Enabling the identification of novel serum response factor target genes, PLoS One. 10 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133751.

  • [3] E. Drokhlyansky, C. S. Smillie, N. VanWittenberghe, M. Ericsson, G. K. Griffin, G. Eraslan, D. Dionne, M. S. Cuoco, M. N. Goder-Reiser, T. Sharova, O. Kuksenko, A. J. Aguirre, G. M. Boland, D. Graham, O. Rozenblatt-Rosen, R. J. Xavier, A. Regev, The Human and Mouse Enteric Nervous System at Single-Cell Resolution, Cell. 182 (2020) 1606-1622.e23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.08.003.

  • [4] J. Y. H. Liu, P. Du, W. Y. Chan, J. A. Rudd, Use of a microelectrode array to record extracellular pacemaker potentials from the gastrointestinal tracts of the ICR mouse and house musk shrew (Suncus murinus), Cell Calcium. 80 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceca.2019.05.002.

  • [5] C. Owyang, W. L. Hasler, Physiology and pathophysiology of the interstitial cells of cajal: From bench to bedside VI. Pathogenesis and therapeutic approaches to human gastric dysrhythmias, Am. J. Physiol.—Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 283 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpgi.00095.2002.

  • [6] G. J. Sanger, P. L. R. Andrews, A history of drug discovery for treatment of nausea and vomiting and the implications for future research, Front. Pharmacol. 9 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.00913.

  • [7] W. E. Longo, A. M. Vernava, Prokinetic agents for lower gastrointestinal motility disorders, Dis. Colon Rectum. 36 (1993) 696-708. https.//doi.org/10.1007/13F02238599.

  • [8] E. Schaeffer, D. Berg, Dopaminergic Therapies for Non-motor Symptoms in Parkinson's Disease, CNS Drugs. 31 (2017) 551-570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-017-0450-z.

  • [9] M. Verny, F. Blanc, Maladie à corps de Lewy avec troubles neurocognitifs majeurs: le traitement selon la mèdecine basée sur les preuves et en pratique, Geriatr. Psychol. Neuropsychiatr. Vieil. 17 (2019) 189-197. https://doi.org/10.1684/pnv.2019.0803.

  • [10] J. L. Barboza, M. S. Okun, B. Moshiree, The treatment of gastroparesis, constipation and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth syndrome in patients with Parkinson's disease, Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 16 (2015) 2449-2464. https://doi.org/10.1517/14656566.2015.1086747.

  • [11] J. Y. H. Liu, P. Du, Z. Lu, J. S. C. Kung, I. B. Huang, J. C. M. Hui, H. S. H. Ng, M. P. Ngan, D. Cui, B. Jiang, S. W. Chan, J. A. Rudd, Involvement of TRPV1 and TRPA1 in the modulation of pacemaker potentials in the mouse ileum, Cell Calcium. 97 (2021) 102417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceca.2021.102417.

  • [12] J. Y. H. Liu, P. Du, J. A. Rudd, Acetylcholine exerts inhibitory and excitatory actions on mouse ileal pacemaker activity: Role of muscarinic versus nicotinic receptors, Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 319 (2020) G97-G107. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpgi.00003.2020.

  • [13] L. Z, Z. Y, T. L, C. S W, N. M P, C. D, L. Y H J, H. I B, K. J S C, H. C M J, R. J A, Sulprostone-Induced Gastric Dysrhythmia in the Ferret: Conventional and Advanced Analytical Approaches, Front. Physiol. 11 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/FPHYS.2020.583082.

  • [14] P. C K, B. S V, H. S, S. M, S. H E, G. A L, Mosaic organization of DNA nucleotides, Phys. Rev. E. Stat. Phys. Plasmas. Fluids. Relat. Interdiscip. Topics. 49 (1994) 1685-1689. https://doi.org/10.1103/PHYSREVE.49.1685.

  • [15] J. W. Kantelhardt, E. Koscielny-Bunde, H. I. A. Rego, S. Havlin, A. Bunde, Detecting long-range correlations with detrended fluctuation analysis, Phys. A Stat. Mech. Its Appl. 295 (2001) 441-454. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4371(01)00144-3.

  • [16] C. M, G. A L, P. C K, Multiscale entropy analysis of complex physiologic time series, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (20029. https://doi.org/10.1103/PHYSREVLETT.89.068102.

  • [17] H. N. Liu, S. Ohya, Y. Nishizawa, K. Sawamnura, S. Iino, M. M. Syed, K. Goto, Y. Imaizumi, S. Nakayama, Serotonin augments gut pacemaker activity via 5-HT 3 receptors, PLoS One. 6 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024928.

  • [18] N. S, O. R, S. K, W. K, H. K, Microelectrode array evaluation of gut pacemaker activity in wild-type and W/W(v) mice, Biosens. Bioelectron. 25 (2009) 61-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/J. BIOS.2009.06.006.

  • [19] H. Morishita, N. Iwata, C. Takai, N. Mochizuki, N. Kaji, M. Hori, S. Kajioka, S. Nakayama, Micro-Coordination of Pacemaker Potentials in the Intestine of the Mouse, Gastroenterology. 152 (2017) 1831-18331e4. https://doi.org/10.1053/J.GASTRO.2017.04.016.

  • [20] T. M, K. S, S. H B, S. K, N. S, Spatial analysis of slowly oscillating electric activity in the gut of mice using low impedance arrayed microelectrodes, PLoS One. 8 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0075235.

  • [21] I. N, F. T, T. C, O. K, K S, N. S, Dialysis membrane-enforced microelectrode array measurement of diverse gut electrical activity, Biosens. Bioelectron. 94 (2017) 312-320. https://doi.org/10.1016/J. BIOS.2017.03.002.

  • [22] S. Nakayama, K. Shimono, H. N. Liu, H. Jiko, N. Katayama, T. Tomita, K. Goto, Pacemaker phase shift in the absence of neural activity in guinea-pig stomach: A microelectrode array study, J. Physiol. (2006). https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2006.118893.

  • [23] C.-S. C D, S. J J, Oral absorption of sodium pentobarbital and effects on gastrointestinal function, Pharmacol. Toxicol. 64 (1989) 23-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/JT 1600-0773.1989.TB00594.X.

  • [24] S. T, K. T, H. K, M. T, Y. H, O. S, S. Y, N. S, I. Y, Conversion of Ca 2+ oscillation into propagative electrical signals by Ca 2+-activated ion channels and connexin as a reconstituted Ca 2+ clock model for the pacemaker activity, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 510 (2019) 242-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BBRC.2019.01.080.

  • [25] S. H B, S. H, I. S, N. S, Acceleration of ileal pacemaker activity in mice lacking interleukin 10, Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 19 (2013) 1577-1585. https://doi.org/10.1097/MIB.0B013E31828EEDF5.

  • [26] L. P, W. S M, C. A., N. M A, S. K M, Spontaneous electrical activity of interstitial cells of Cajal isolated from canine proximal colon, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 86 (1989) 7280-7284. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.86.18.7280.

  • [27] S. K M, S. T K, Motoneurones of the submucous plexus regulate electrical activity of the circular muscle of canine proximal colon, J. Physiol. 380 (1986) 293-310. https://doi.org/10.1113/JPHYSIOL.1986.SP016286.

  • [28] P. K J, H. G W, L. H T, S. N J, W. S M, S. T K, S. K M, Spatial and temporal mapping of pacemaker activity in interstitial cells of Cajal in mouse ileum in situ, Am J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 290 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1152/AJPCELL.00447.2005.

  • [29] S Nakayama, S. Kajioka, K. Goto, M. Takaki, H.-N. Liu, Calcium-associated mechanisms in gut pacemaker activity, J. Cell. Mol. Med. 11 (2007) 958. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1582-4934.2007.00107.X.

  • [30] K. M. Sanders, S. D. Koh, S. M. Ward, Interstitial cells of Cajal as pacemakers in the gastrointestinal tract, Annu. Rev. Physiol. 68 (2006) 307-343. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.physiol.68.040504.091718.



H. N. Liu, H. Hirata, Y. Okuno, M. Okabe, K. Furukawa, Dopamine and Serotonin Receptors Cooperatively Modulate Pacemaker Activity of Intestinal Cells of Cajal, Chin. J. Physiol. 61 (2018) 302-312. https://doi.org/10.4077/CJP.2018.BAH-607.

  • [32] R. Hardoff, M. Sula, A. Tamir, A. Soil, A. Front, S. Badarna, S. Honigman, N. Giladi, Gastric emptying time and gastric motility in patients with Parkinson's disease, Mov. Disord. (2001). https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.1203.
  • [33] H. Phan, A. DeReese, A. J. Day, M. Carvalho, The dual role of domperidone in gastroparesis and lactation, it. J. Pharm. Compd. 18 (2014) 203-7. http://wvw.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25306766 (accessed Jul. 9, 2020).
  • [34] H. V. Gupta, K. E. Lyons, R. Pahxwa, Old Drugs, New Delivery Systems in Parkinson's Disease, Drugs and Aging. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-019-00682-9.
  • [35] van L. T, B. R, The need for non-oral therapy in Parkinson's disease; a potential role for apomorphine, Parkinsonism Relat. Disord. 33 Suppl 1 (2016) S22-S27. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PARKRELDIS.2016.11.019.
  • [36] M. G. Zizzo, A. Bellanca, A. Amato, R. Serio, Opposite effects of dopamine on the mechanical activity of circular and longitudinal muscle of human colon, Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 32 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.13811.
  • [37] H. Tateno, R. Sakakibara, S. Shiina, H. Doi, F. Tateno, M. Sato, T. Masaka, M. Kishi, Y. Tsuyusaki, Y. Aiba, T. Ogata, Y. Suzuki, Transdermal Dopamine Agonist Ameliorates Gastric Emptying in Parkinson's Disease, J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 63 (2015) 2416-2418. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13800.
  • [38] T. Lüscher Dias, V. Schuch, P. C. B. Beltrão-Braga, D Martins-de-Souza, H. P. Brentani, G. R. Franco, H. I. Nakaya, Drug repositioning for psychiatric and neurological disorders through a network medicine approach, Transl. Psychiatry. 10 (2020) 141. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-020-0827-5.
  • [39] F. Gentile, V. Agrawal, M. Hsing, A. T. Ton, F. Ban, U. Norinder, M. E. Gleave, A. Cherkasov, Deep Docking: A Deep Learning Platform for Augmentation of Structure Based Drug Discovery, ACS Cent. Sci. 6 (2020) 939-949. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.0c00229.
  • [40] H. Li, Z. Gao, L. Kang, H. Zhang, K. Yang, K. Yul, X. Luo, W. Zhu, K. Chen, J. Shen, X. Wang, H. Jiang, TarFisDock: A web server for identifying drug targets with docking approach, Nucleic Acids Res. 34 (2006) W219-W224. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl114.
  • [41] K. Sachdev, M. K. Gupta, A comprehensive review of computational techniques for the prediction of drug side effects, Drug Dev. Res. 81 (2020) 650-670. https://doi.org/10.1002/DDR.21669.
  • [42] Liu J. Y. H., Rudd J. A., Du P.* (2021) A pipeline for phase-based analysis of in vitro micro-electrode array recordings of gastrointestinal slow waves. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. [PMID: 34891286]
  • [43] Vo A H, VanVleet T R, Gupta R R, Liguori M J, Rao M S. An Overview of Machine Learning and Big Data for Drug Toxicity Evaluation. Chem Res Toxicol 2020; 33:20-37. https://doi.org/10.1021/ACS.CHEMRESTOX.9B00227.
  • [44] Lee C Y, Chen Y P P. Prediction of drug adverse events using deep learning in pharmaceutical discovery. Brief Bioinform 2021; 22:1884-901. https://doi.org/10.1093/BIB/BBAA040.
  • [45] Petra A I, Panagiotidou S, Hatziagelaki E, Stewart J M, Conti P, Theoharides T C. Gut-microbiota-brain axis and effect on neuropsychiatric disorders with suspected immune dysregulation. Clin Ther 2015; 37:984. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLINTHERA 2015.04.002.
  • [46] Kuhn M, Letunic I, Jensen L J, Bork P. The SIDER database of drugs and side effects. Nucleic Acids Res 2016; 44:D1075-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/NAR/GKV1075.
  • [47] Radu B M, Banciu A, Banciu D D, Radu M, Cretoiu D, Cretoiu S M. Calcium Signaling in Interstitial Cells: Focus on Telocytes. Int J Mol Sci 2017; 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJMS18020397.
  • [48] Tyers M B, Bunce K T, Humphrey P P A. Pharmacological and anti-emetic properties of ondansetron. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1989; 25 Suppl 1.
  • [49] Stern H. Serotonin, and its effects on the pituitary-adrenal axis in depression. Chic Med Sch Q 1970; 29:24-30.
  • Keren D F. Intestinal mucosal immune defense mechanisms. Am J Surg Pathol 1988; 12 Suppl 1:100-5.

Claims
  • 1. A method of testing effects of one or more substances on pacemaker activity on gastrointestinal tissues using a recording platform to determine whether the one or more substances belong to one or more classes, the method comprising: applying a substance for testing on at least one sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue from a living organism;maintaining the tissue in oxygenated medium to maintain a viability of the tissue;recording electrical signals from a surface of the tissue using the recording platform to create a recorded digital signal;storing the recorded digital signal in a data storage device;generating a plurality of test results by analyzing the recorded digital signal using a set of machine-readable instructions that allow a computer to extract at least one feature from the recorded digital signal;storing the plurality of test results into a database;training one or more machine learning models based on the plurality of test results stored in the database, to create a trained model;applying the trained model for classifying, predicting, or comparing the substance; andreporting a result of the classifying, predicting, or comparing.
  • 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the substance comprises one or more of drugs, pharmacological agents, chemical compounds, synthesized substances, food, remedies, herbs, extracts, and any combination thereof.
  • 3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the recording platform comprises a signal receiver, an amplifier, an internal filter, a grounding electrode, and a microelectrode array chip; the microelectrode array chip comprising a multiplicity of microelectrodes embedded on a rigid substrate.
  • 4. The method according to claim 1, comprising predicting and classifying between agonist and antagonist actions of the one or more substances, or predicting and classifying between high-risk and low-risk in a set of selected side effects of the substance.
  • 5. The method according to claim 4, the set of selected side effects comprising one or more of vomiting, emesis, nausea, diarrhea, constipation, abdominal discomfort, and dysrhythmia.
  • 6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue comprises tissue from an esophagus, stomach, duodenum, jejunum, ileum, rectum, caecum, or colon.
  • 7. The method according to claim 1, wherein the living organism is an organism having functional gastrointestinal organs.
  • 8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the living organism is human, mammalian, reptilian, or aquatic.
  • 9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the living organism is healthy; or is diagnosed with a disease, genetic condition, or alteration; or is pre-treated with the substance prior to the applying the substance for testing.
  • 10. The method according to claim 1, further comprising the step of removing contents from within the freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue.
  • 11. The method according to claim 1, further comprising maintaining the temperature of the freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue within a range of twenty to forty degrees Celsius.
  • 12. The method according to claim 1, further comprising recording a baseline signal for at least five minutes prior to the applying the substance for testing.
  • 13. The method according to claim 12, the applying the substance for testing comprising delivering a specified quantity of the substance onto the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue at a specified time after the recording of the baseline signal.
  • 14. The method according to claim 13, wherein the delivering comprises either direct delivery using a handheld pipette or machine-controlled delivery using a machine-controlled perfusion system.
  • 15. The method according to claim 13, wherein the recording electrical signals occurs after the delivering of the specified quantity of the substance onto the sub-segment of freshly isolated gastrointestinal tissue at the specified time, and wherein the recorded digital signal is a post-substance delivery signal.
  • 16. The method according to claim 15, further comprising comparing the baseline signal to the post-substance delivery signal.
  • 17. The method according to claim 1, wherein the recorded digital signal is created within less than one hour after the applying one or more substances for testing.
  • 18. The method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one feature from the recorded digital signal comprises one or more of: the determination of a number of dominant propagation patterns using a factor of respective activation times found at each electrode within a baseline period and a post-substance delivery period, respectively, into a time interval between ten to sixty seconds;the percentage of the dominant propagation patterns found in the baseline period and the post-substance delivery period, respectively; andthe change in the percentage of a first, second, or third propagation pattern based on a comparison between the baseline period and the post-substance delivery period.
  • 19. The method according to claim 1, the substance being a first substance and the database comprising (i) a first unique individual database section configured to store the at least one feature from the recorded digital signal for the first substance and (i) a second unique individual database section configured to store at least one feature from a recorded digital signal for a second substance.
  • 20. The method according to claim 19, comprising: building a trained machine learning model based on the first unique individual database section and the second unique individual database section; andintegrating the first unique individual database section and the second unique individual database section with at least one other database or training model.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 63/268,957, filed Mar. 7, 2022, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety including any tables, figures, or drawings.

Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
63268957 Mar 2022 US