IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1000914.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regression Analysis for Constraining Free Parameters in Electrophysiological Models of Cardiac Cells

Author

Listed:
  • Amrita X Sarkar
  • Eric A Sobie

Abstract

A major challenge in computational biology is constraining free parameters in mathematical models. Adjusting a parameter to make a given model output more realistic sometimes has unexpected and undesirable effects on other model behaviors. Here, we extend a regression-based method for parameter sensitivity analysis and show that a straightforward procedure can uniquely define most ionic conductances in a well-known model of the human ventricular myocyte. The model's parameter sensitivity was analyzed by randomizing ionic conductances, running repeated simulations to measure physiological outputs, then collecting the randomized parameters and simulation results as “input” and “output” matrices, respectively. Multivariable regression derived a matrix whose elements indicate how changes in conductances influence model outputs. We show here that if the number of linearly-independent outputs equals the number of inputs, the regression matrix can be inverted. This is significant, because it implies that the inverted matrix can specify the ionic conductances that are required to generate a particular combination of model outputs. Applying this idea to the myocyte model tested, we found that most ionic conductances could be specified with precision (R2 > 0.77 for 12 out of 16 parameters). We also applied this method to a test case of changes in electrophysiology caused by heart failure and found that changes in most parameters could be well predicted. We complemented our findings using a Bayesian approach to demonstrate that model parameters cannot be specified using limited outputs, but they can be successfully constrained if multiple outputs are considered. Our results place on a solid mathematical footing the intuition-based procedure simultaneously matching a model's output to several data sets. More generally, this method shows promise as a tool to define model parameters, in electrophysiology and in other biological fields.Author Summary: Mathematical models of biological processes generally contain many free parameters that are not known from experiments. Choosing values for these parameters, although an important step in the construction of realistic computational models, is frequently performed using an ad hoc approach that is a combination of intuition and trial and error. We have developed a novel method for constraining free parameters in mathematical models based on the techniques of linear algebra. We demonstrate this method's utility through simulations with a model of a human heart cell. The underlying premise is that if the model is only asked to recapitulate one or a few biological behaviors, the values of the parameters may be ambiguous; however, if the model must simultaneously match many features of experimental data, the free parameters can be determined uniquely. The results demonstrate that if computational models are to be realistic, they must be compared with several sets of data at the same time. This new method should serve as a valuable tool for investigators interested in developing realistic mathematical models of biological processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Amrita X Sarkar & Eric A Sobie, 2010. "Regression Analysis for Constraining Free Parameters in Electrophysiological Models of Cardiac Cells," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-11, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1000914
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000914
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000914
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000914&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000914?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ryan N Gutenkunst & Joshua J Waterfall & Fergal P Casey & Kevin S Brown & Christopher R Myers & James P Sethna, 2007. "Universally Sloppy Parameter Sensitivities in Systems Biology Models," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(10), pages 1-8, October.
    2. Michael C. Sanguinetti & Martin Tristani-Firouzi, 2006. "hERG potassium channels and cardiac arrhythmia," Nature, Nature, vol. 440(7083), pages 463-469, March.
    3. Pablo Achard & Erik De Schutter, 2006. "Complex Parameter Landscape for a Complex Neuron Model," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(7), pages 1-11, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joshua Mayourian & Ruben M Savizky & Eric A Sobie & Kevin D Costa, 2016. "Modeling Electrophysiological Coupling and Fusion between Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Cardiomyocytes," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, July.
    2. Willemijn Groenendaal & Francis A Ortega & Armen R Kherlopian & Andrew C Zygmunt & Trine Krogh-Madsen & David J Christini, 2015. "Cell-Specific Cardiac Electrophysiology Models," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, April.
    3. Timothy Rumbell & James Kozloski, 2019. "Dimensions of control for subthreshold oscillations and spontaneous firing in dopamine neurons," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-34, September.
    4. Massimiliano Zaniboni & Francesca Cacciani & Robert L Lux, 2014. "Beat-to-Beat Cycle Length Variability of Spontaneously Beating Guinea Pig Sinoatrial Cells: Relative Contributions of the Membrane and Calcium Clocks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-15, June.
    5. John Walmsley & Jose F Rodriguez & Gary R Mirams & Kevin Burrage & Igor R Efimov & Blanca Rodriguez, 2013. "mRNA Expression Levels in Failing Human Hearts Predict Cellular Electrophysiological Remodeling: A Population-Based Simulation Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-11, February.
    6. Jaspreet Kaur & Anders Nygren & Edward J Vigmond, 2014. "Fitting Membrane Resistance along with Action Potential Shape in Cardiac Myocytes Improves Convergence: Application of a Multi-Objective Parallel Genetic Algorithm," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-10, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Samuel Bandara & Johannes P Schlöder & Roland Eils & Hans Georg Bock & Tobias Meyer, 2009. "Optimal Experimental Design for Parameter Estimation of a Cell Signaling Model," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(11), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Adel Dayarian & Madalena Chaves & Eduardo D Sontag & Anirvan M Sengupta, 2009. "Shape, Size, and Robustness: Feasible Regions in the Parameter Space of Biochemical Networks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, January.
    3. Timothy Rumbell & James Kozloski, 2019. "Dimensions of control for subthreshold oscillations and spontaneous firing in dopamine neurons," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-34, September.
    4. Hongwei Shao & Tao Peng & Zhiwei Ji & Jing Su & Xiaobo Zhou, 2013. "Systematically Studying Kinase Inhibitor Induced Signaling Network Signatures by Integrating Both Therapeutic and Side Effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Alireza Yazdani & Lu Lu & Maziar Raissi & George Em Karniadakis, 2020. "Systems biology informed deep learning for inferring parameters and hidden dynamics," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-19, November.
    6. Fridtjof Brauns & Leila Iñigo de la Cruz & Werner K.-G. Daalman & Ilse Bruin & Jacob Halatek & Liedewij Laan & Erwin Frey, 2023. "Redundancy and the role of protein copy numbers in the cell polarization machinery of budding yeast," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Eberhard O Voit & Harald A Martens & Stig W Omholt, 2015. "150 Years of the Mass Action Law," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-7, January.
    8. Céline Christiansen-Jucht & Kamil Erguler & Chee Yan Shek & María-Gloria Basáñez & Paul E. Parham, 2015. "Modelling Anopheles gambiae s.s. Population Dynamics with Temperature- and Age-Dependent Survival," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-31, May.
    9. Gabriele Lillacci & Mustafa Khammash, 2010. "Parameter Estimation and Model Selection in Computational Biology," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(3), pages 1-17, March.
    10. Andrew White & Malachi Tolman & Howard D Thames & Hubert Rodney Withers & Kathy A Mason & Mark K Transtrum, 2016. "The Limitations of Model-Based Experimental Design and Parameter Estimation in Sloppy Systems," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-26, December.
    11. Diego Fernández Slezak & Cecilia Suárez & Guillermo A Cecchi & Guillermo Marshall & Gustavo Stolovitzky, 2010. "When the Optimal Is Not the Best: Parameter Estimation in Complex Biological Models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-10, October.
    12. Elba Raimúndez & Simone Keller & Gwen Zwingenberger & Karolin Ebert & Sabine Hug & Fabian J Theis & Dieter Maier & Birgit Luber & Jan Hasenauer, 2020. "Model-based analysis of response and resistance factors of cetuximab treatment in gastric cancer cell lines," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-21, March.
    13. Joseph D Taylor & Samuel Winnall & Alain Nogaret, 2020. "Estimation of neuron parameters from imperfect observations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-22, July.
    14. Dimitrios V Vavoulis & Volko A Straub & John A D Aston & Jianfeng Feng, 2012. "A Self-Organizing State-Space-Model Approach for Parameter Estimation in Hodgkin-Huxley-Type Models of Single Neurons," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-1, March.
    15. Xinxian Shao & Andrew Mugler & Justin Kim & Ha Jun Jeong & Bruce R Levin & Ilya Nemenman, 2017. "Growth of bacteria in 3-d colonies," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Maksat Ashyraliyev & Ken Siggens & Hilde Janssens & Joke Blom & Michael Akam & Johannes Jaeger, 2009. "Gene Circuit Analysis of the Terminal Gap Gene huckebein," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-16, October.
    17. Agus Hartoyo & Peter J Cadusch & David T J Liley & Damien G Hicks, 2019. "Parameter estimation and identifiability in a neural population model for electro-cortical activity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-27, May.
    18. Mustafa Baz & Brady Hunsaker & Oleg Prokopyev, 2011. "How much do we “pay” for using default parameters?," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 91-108, January.
    19. Christian A Tiemann & Joep Vanlier & Maaike H Oosterveer & Albert K Groen & Peter A J Hilbers & Natal A W van Riel, 2013. "Parameter Trajectory Analysis to Identify Treatment Effects of Pharmacological Interventions," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, August.
    20. Zachary R Fox & Brian Munsky, 2019. "The finite state projection based Fisher information matrix approach to estimate information and optimize single-cell experiments," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1000914. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.