Determining controllability of sepsis using genetic algorithms on a proxy agent-based model of systemic inflammation

Sepsis, a manifestation of the body’s inflammatory response to injury and infection, has a mortality rate of between 28%-50% and affects approximately 1 million patients annually in the United States. Currently, there are no therapies targeting the cellular/molecular processes driving sepsis that have demonstrated the ability to control this disease process in the clinical setting. We propose that this is in great part due to the considerable heterogeneity of the clinical trajectories that constitute clinical “sepsis,” and that determining how this system can be controlled back into a state of health requires the application of concepts drawn from the field of dynamical systems. In this work, we consider the human immune system to be a random dynamical system, and investigate its potential controllability using an agent-based model of the innate immune response (the Innate Immune Response ABM or IIRABM) as a surrogate, proxy system. Simulation experiments with the IIRABM provide an explanation as to why single/limited cytokine perturbations at a single, or small number of, time points is unlikely to significantly improve the mortality rate of sepsis. We then use genetic algorithms (GA) to explore and characterize multi-targeted control strategies for the random dynamical immune system that guide it from a persistent, non-recovering inflammatory state (functionally equivalent to the clinical states of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or sepsis) to a state of health. We train the GA on a single parameter set with multiple stochastic replicates, and show that while the calculated results show good generalizability, more advanced strategies are needed to achieve the goal of adaptive personalized medicine. This work evaluating the extent of interventions needed to control a simplified surrogate model of sepsis provides insight into the scope of the clinical challenge, and can serve as a guide on the path towards true “precision control” of sepsis. Author summary Sepsis, characterized by the body’s inflammatory response to injury and infection, has a mortality rate of between 28%-50% and affects approximately 1 million patients annually in the United States. Currently, there are no therapies targeting the cellular/molecular processes driving sepsis that have demonstrated the ability to control this disease process. In this work, we utilize a computational model of the human immune response to infectious injury to offer an explanation as to why previously attempted treatment strategies are inadequate and why the current approach to drug/therapy-development is inadequate. We then use evolutionary computation algorithms to explore drug-intervention space using this same computational model. This allows us to characterize the scale and scope of interventions needed to successfully control sepsis, as well as the types of data needed to derive these interventions. We demonstrate that multi-point and time-dependent varying controls are necessary and able to control the cytokine network dynamics of the immune system.

[1]  R. Sharapov,et al.  Convergence of genetic algorithms , 2006, Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis.

[2]  E. Polak,et al.  Theory of optimal control and mathematical programming , 1969 .

[3]  Terry L. Friesz Nonlinear Programming and Discrete-Time Optimal Control , 2010 .

[4]  Shayn M. Peirce,et al.  Multi-cell Agent-based Simulation of the Microvasculature to Study the Dynamics of Circulating Inflammatory Cell Trafficking , 2007, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[5]  Gary An,et al.  Investigation of Inflammation and Tissue Patterning in the Gut Using a Spatially Explicit General-Purpose Model of Enteric Tissue (SEGMEnT) , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[6]  Jürgen Schmidhuber,et al.  Learning to Forget: Continual Prediction with LSTM , 2000, Neural Computation.

[7]  M. Halloran,et al.  Finding optimal vaccination strategies for pandemic influenza using genetic algorithms. , 2005, Journal of theoretical biology.

[8]  D Goldberg,et al.  Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences , 2010, Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences.

[9]  Gary An,et al.  Towards Anatomic Scale Agent-Based Modeling with a Massively Parallel Spatially Explicit General-Purpose Model of Enteric Tissue (SEGMEnT_HPC) , 2015, PloS one.

[10]  S. Strogatz Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering , 1995 .

[11]  Gary An,et al.  Sepsis reconsidered: Identifying novel metrics for behavioral landscape characterization with a high-performance computing implementation of an agent-based model. , 2017, Journal of theoretical biology.

[12]  Norbert Gretz,et al.  miRWalk - Database: Prediction of possible miRNA binding sites by "walking" the genes of three genomes , 2011, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[13]  G. An In silico experiments of existing and hypothetical cytokine-directed clinical trials using agent-based modeling* , 2004, Critical care medicine.

[14]  Edward Walker,et al.  The Real Cost of a CPU Hour , 2009, Computer.

[15]  Derek C. Angus,et al.  Pharmacoeconomic Implications of New Therapies in Sepsis , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[16]  John L. Nazareth An Optimization Primer: On Models, Algorithms, and Duality , 2004 .

[17]  R Laubenbacher,et al.  Optimization and Control of Agent-Based Models in Biology: A Perspective , 2016, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[18]  Carmine Spagnuolo,et al.  From desktop to Large-Scale Model Exploration with Swift/T , 2016, 2016 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC).

[19]  F Castiglione,et al.  An enhanced agent based model of the immune system response. , 2006, Cellular immunology.

[20]  Alex Graves,et al.  Playing Atari with Deep Reinforcement Learning , 2013, ArXiv.

[21]  Cédric Feschotte,et al.  Mariner-like transposases are widespread and diverse in flowering plants , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  A Comparison of Selection Schemes Used in Evolutionary Algorithms , 1996, Evolutionary Computation.

[23]  J. Marshall,et al.  Clinical trials of mediator-directed therapy in sepsis: what have we learned? , 2000, Intensive Care Medicine.

[24]  Tomasz Dominik Gwiazda,et al.  Crossover for single-objective numerical optimization problems , 2006 .

[25]  S. Opal,et al.  The Next Generation of Sepsis Clinical Trial Designs: What Is Next After the Demise of Recombinant Human Activated Protein C?* , 2014, Critical care medicine.

[26]  Gary An,et al.  In silico augmentation of the drug development pipeline: examples from the study of acute inflammation , 2011, Drug development research.

[27]  Mukul Majumdar,et al.  Random dynamical systems: a review , 2003 .

[28]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Selection Schemes Used in Genetic Algorithms , 1990, FOGA.

[29]  Mervyn Singer,et al.  Biomarkers in sepsis , 2013, Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine.

[30]  V. Araújo Random Dynamical Systems , 2006, math/0608162.

[31]  David S. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function , 1998, J. Comput. Chem..

[32]  Marc Parizeau,et al.  DEAP: evolutionary algorithms made easy , 2012, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[33]  Eric Bonabeau,et al.  Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  Robert C. Wolpert,et al.  A Review of the , 1985 .

[35]  Chang Wook Ahn,et al.  On the practical genetic algorithms , 2005, GECCO '05.