4.3 Review

Improving the generation and selection of virtual populations in quantitative systems pharmacology models

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2018.06.002

关键词

Global optimization; Acceptance rejection sampling; Mathematical modeling; Ordinary differential equations; Genetic algorithm; Metropolis-Hastings

资金

  1. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism [1R01AA022714-01A1]
  2. Air Force Office of Scientific Research [AFOSR FA9550-15-1-0298]
  3. US Department of Education Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN) [P200A120047]
  4. Clarendon fund
  5. EPSRC [EP/G036861/1]
  6. Pfizer Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) models aim to describe mechanistically the pathophysiology of disease and predict the effects of therapies on that disease. For most drug development applications, it is important to predict not only the mean response to an intervention but also the distribution of responses, due to inter-patient variability. Given the necessary complexity of QSP models, and the sparsity of relevant human data, the parameters of QSP models are often not well determined. One approach to overcome these limitations is to develop alternative virtual patients (VPs) and virtual populations (Vpops), which allow for the exploration of parametric uncertainty and reproduce inter-patient variability in response to perturbation. Here we evaluated approaches to improve the efficiency of generating Vpops. We aimed to generate Vpops without sacrificing diversity of the VPs' pathophysiologies and phenotypes. To do this, we built upon a previously published approach (Allen et al., 2016) by (a) incorporating alternative optimization algorithms (genetic algorithm and Metropolis-Hastings) or alternatively (b) augmenting the optimized objective function. Each method improved the baseline algorithm by requiring significantly fewer plausible patients (precursors to VPs) to create a reasonable Vpop. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据