Evolution has conserved ‘economic’ systems that perform many functions, faster or better, with less. For example, three to five leukocyte types protect from thousands of pathogens. To achieve so much with so little, biological systems combine their limited elements, creating complex structures. Yet, the prevalent research paradigm is reductionist. Focusing on infectious diseases, reductionist and non-reductionist views are here described. The literature indicates that reductionism is associated with information loss and errors, while non-reductionist operations can extract more information from the same data. When designed to capture one-to-many/many-to-one interactions –including the use of arrows that connect pairs of consecutive observations–, non-reductionist (spatial-temporal) constructs eliminate data variability from all dimensions, except along one line, while arrows describe the directionality of temporal changes that occur along the line. To validate the patterns detected by non-reductionist operations, reductionist procedures are needed. Integrated (non-reductionist and reductionist) methods can (i) distinguish data subsets that differ immunologically and statistically; (ii) differentiate false-negative from -positive errors; (iii) discriminate disease stages; (iv) capture in vivo, multilevel interactions that consider the patient, the microbe, and antibiotic-mediated responses; and (v) assess dynamics. Integrated methods provide repeatable and biologically interpretable information.

Improved characterization of infectious disease dynamics is required. To that end, three-dimensional (3D) data analysis of feedback-like processes may be considered. To detect infectious disease data patterns, a systems biology (SB) and evolutionary biology (EB) approach was evaluated, which utilizes leukocyte data structures designed to diminish data variability and enhance discrimination. Using data collected from one avian and two mammalian (human and bovine) species infected with viral, parasite, or bacterial agents (both sensitive and resistant to antimicrobials), four data structures were explored: (i) counts or percentages of a single leukocyte type, such as lymphocytes, neutrophils, or macrophages (the classic approach), and three levels of the SB/EB approach, which assessed (ii) 2D, (iii) 3D, and (iv) multi-dimensional (rotating 3D) host-microbial interactions. In all studies, no classic data structure discriminated disease-positive (D+, or observations in which a microbe was isolated) from disease-negative (D–, or microbial-negative) groups: D+ and D– data distributions overlapped. In contrast, multi-dimensional analysis of indicators designed to possess desirable features, such as a single line of observations, displayed a continuous, circular data structure, whose abrupt inflections facilitated partitioning into subsets statistically significantly different from one another. In all studies, the 3D, SB/EB approach distinguished three (steady, positive, and negative) feedback phases, in which D– data characterized the steady state phase, and D+ data were found in the positive and negative phases. In humans, spatial patterns revealed false-negative observations and three malaria-positive data classes. In both humans and bovines, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections were discriminated from non-MRSA infections. More information can be extracted, from the same data, provided that data are structured, their 3D relationships are considered, and well-conserved (feedback-like) functions are estimated. Patterns emerging from such structures may distinguish well-conserved from recently developed host-microbial interactions. Applications include diagnosis, error detection, and modeling.

Approximately 1500 people die annually due to rabies in the United Republic of Tanzania. Moshi, in the Kilimanjaro Region, reported sporadic cases of human rabies between 2017 and 2018. In response and following a One Health approach, we implemented surveillance, monitoring, as well as a mass vaccinations of domestic pets concurrently in >150 villages, achieving a 74.5% vaccination coverage (n = 29, 885 dogs and cats) by September 2018. As of April 2019, no single human or animal case has been recorded. We have observed a disparity between awareness and knowledge levels of community members on rabies epidemiology. Self-adherence to protective rabies vaccination in animals was poor due to the challenges of costs and distances to vaccination centers, among others. Incidence of dog bites was high and only a fraction (65%) of dog bite victims (humans) received post-exposure prophylaxis. A high proportion of unvaccinated dogs and cats and the relative intense interactions with wild dog species at interfaces were the risk factors for seropositivity to rabies virus infection in dogs. A percentage of the previously vaccinated dogs remained unimmunized and some unvaccinated dogs were seropositive. Evidence of community engagement and multi-coordinated implementation of One Health in Moshi serves as an example of best practice in tackling zoonotic diseases using multi-level government efforts. The district-level establishment of the One Health rapid response team (OHRRT), implementation of a carefully structured routine vaccination campaign, improved health education, and the implementation of barriers between domestic animals and wildlife at the interfaces are necessary to reduce the burden of rabies in Moshi and communities with similar profiles.

To effectively control the geographical dissemination of infectious diseases, their properties need to be determined. To test that rapid microbial dispersal requires not only susceptible hosts but also a pre-existing, connecting network, we explored constructs meant to reveal the network properties associated with disease spread, which included the road structure. Using geo-temporal data collected from epizoonotics in which all hosts were susceptible (mammals infected by Foot-and-mouth disease virus, Uruguay, 2001; birds infected by Avian Influenza virus H5N1, Nigeria, 2006), two models were compared: 1) ‘connectivity’, a model that integrated bio-physical concepts (the agent’s transmission cycle, road topology) into indicators designed to measure networks (‘nodes’ or infected sites with short- and long-range links), and 2) ‘contacts’, which focused on infected individuals but did not assess connectivity. The connectivity model showed five network properties: 1) spatial aggregation of cases (disease clusters), 2) links among similar ‘nodes’ (assortativity), 3) simultaneous activation of similar nodes (synchronicity), 4) disease flows moving from highly to poorly connected nodes (directionality), and 5) a few nodes accounting for most cases (a “20∶80″ pattern). In both epizoonotics, 1) not all primary cases were connected but at least one primary case was connected, 2) highly connected, small areas (nodes) accounted for most cases, 3) several classes of nodes were distinguished, and 4) the contact model, which assumed all primary cases were identical, captured half the number of cases identified by the connectivity model. When assessed together, the synchronicity and directionality properties explained when and where an infectious disease spreads. Geo-temporal constructs of Network Theory’s nodes and links were retrospectively validated in rapidly disseminating infectious diseases. They distinguished classes of cases, nodes, and networks, generating information usable to revise theory and optimize control measures. Prospective studies that consider pre-outbreak predictors, such as connecting networks, are recommended.

Investigating disease pathogenesis and personalized prognostics are major biomedical needs. Because patients sharing the same diagnosis can experience different outcomes, such as survival or death, physicians need new personalized tools, including those that rapidly differentiate several inflammatory phases. To address these topics, a pattern recognition-based method (PRM) that follows an inverse problem approach was designed to assess, in <10 min, eight concepts: synergy, pleiotropy, complexity, dynamics, ambiguity, circularity, personalized outcomes, and explanatory prognostics (pathogenesis). By creating thousands of secondary combinations derived from blood leukocyte data, the PRM measures synergic, pleiotropic, complex and dynamic data interactions, which provide personalized prognostics while some undesirable features—such as false results and the ambiguity associated with data circularity-are prevented. Here, this method is compared to Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and evaluated with data collected from hantavirus-infected humans and birds that appeared to be healthy. When human data were examined, the PRM predicted 96.9 % of all surviving patients while PCA did not distinguish outcomes. Demonstrating applications in personalized prognosis, eight PRM data structures sufficed to identify all but one of the survivors. Dynamic data patterns also distinguished survivors from non-survivors, as well as one subset of non-survivors, which exhibited chronic inflammation. When the PRM explored avian data, it differentiated immune profiles consistent with no, early, or late inflammation. Yet, PCA did not recognize patterns in avian data. Findings support the notion that immune responses, while variable, are rather deterministic: a low number of complex and dynamic data combinations may be enough to, rapidly, unmask conditions that are neither directly observable nor reliably forecasted.

To rapidly prognosticate and generate hypotheses on pathogenesis, leukocyte multi-cellularity was evaluated in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients treated in India or the United States (152 individuals, 384 temporal observations). Within hospital (<90-day) death or discharge were retrospectively predicted based on the admission complete blood cell counts (CBC). Two methods were applied: (i) a “reductionist” one, which analyzes each cell type separately, and (ii) a “non-reductionist” method, which estimates multi-cellularity. The second approach uses a proprietary software package that detects distinct data patterns generated by complex and hypothetical indicators and reveals each data pattern’s immunological content and associated outcome(s). In the Indian population, the analysis of isolated cell types did not separate survivors from non-survivors. In contrast, multi-cellular data patterns differentiated six groups of patients, including, in two groups, 95.5% of all survivors. Some data structures revealed one data point-wide line of observations, which informed at a personalized level and identified 97.8% of all non-survivors. Discovery was also fostered: some non-survivors were characterized by low monocyte/lymphocyte ratio levels. When both populations were analyzed with the non-reductionist method, they displayed results that suggested survivors and non-survivors differed immunologically as early as hospitalization day 1.