NIH | National Cancer Institute | NCI Wiki  



Safran, Tracy

Wynne, Robert    NIH/NCI [C]x
Ong, Kim L ISx
Lucas, Jason R ISx
Bauer, Scott  Mayox
Stancl, Craig
Endle,  CoryMayox



Review and further define requirements on the value set architecture page.


Discussion Points:
  • LexEVS 6.5.1 Value Set Architecture
  • Kim - Need to improve efficiency of retrieving value set data for view of the tree in browser.
    • Kim asked if we will be creating the tree for him.
  • We reviewed the "Discussion Points" section of the VS Architecture page.
    • Stakeholders -
      • FDA, CDISC, are users through the files.
      • Users of the LexEVS are the editors.  The write value sets into the NCI Thesaurus.
      • They generate files through the ReportWriter (that interacts through LexEVS).
      • They also use the browser to view the value sets.
    • Work Flow - End user interface
      • Tracy suggested that a shell script would be adequate.
    • What considerations/requirements drive the development of an architecture that encompasses hierarchical value sets and new resolution mechanisms?
      • View as hierarchies in the browser. 
      • This would be an extension.
      • There are a couple of value sets that have a few hundred.  Neoplasm has 3000.  There is one that has 8000.
      • How deep are these value sets? 
        • Some are 8-9 levels
      • Flavors of Hierarchical Value Sets
        • Source to Target association based Value Sets
          • NICHD parent value sets. Not doing anything with these currently.  Association is read and creates external file.
          • CDRH parent value sets.
        • subClassOf based Value Sets
          • Neoplasm -
        • Alternative Hierarchy
          • Source to Target
          • Transitive restrictions in the NCI thesaurus
          • Example: Anatomical structure is physical part of
      • Two things to consider:
        • How to arrange value sets. 
        • How to arrange concepts within a value set (out of scope).
      • LexEVS will provide extensions that will help load these value set use cases as value set coding schemes
    • Create OWL source for some/all values sets from LexEVS api or other source? (OWL export of value sets)
      • This is a performance based consideration.  Not a requirement at this time.
    • What user needs around the report writer generate requirements for LexEVS or the LexEVS team?
      • None.  It uses NCIT coding scheme itself, not the value sets.
      • Moving to SPARQL
    • Does Excel spread sheet generation fall into the scope of LexEVS value set resolution or otherwise generate requirements for the LexEVS team?
      • No
    • Do the users/stakeholders in the value set API have any new requirements beyond those already stated
      • Modified result sets from CTS2 - only return specified parts of an entity, not all the values in the entity.

Decision Points:

  • No labels