Developing optimal input design strategies in cancer systems biology with applications to microfluidic device engineering

BackgroundMechanistic models are becoming more and more popular in Systems Biology; identification and control of models underlying biochemical pathways of interest in oncology is a primary goal in this field. Unfortunately the scarce availability of data still limits our understanding of the intrinsic characteristics of complex pathologies like cancer: acquiring information for a system understanding of complex reaction networks is time consuming and expensive. Stimulus response experiments (SRE) have been used to gain a deeper insight into the details of biochemical mechanisms underlying cell life and functioning. Optimisation of the input time-profile, however, still remains a major area of research due to the complexity of the problem and its relevance for the task of information retrieval in systems biology-related experiments.ResultsWe have addressed the problem of quantifying the information associated to an experiment using the Fisher Information Matrix and we have proposed an optimal experimental design strategy based on evolutionary algorithm to cope with the problem of information gathering in Systems Biology. On the basis of the theoretical results obtained in the field of control systems theory, we have studied the dynamical properties of the signals to be used in cell stimulation. The results of this study have been used to develop a microfluidic device for the automation of the process of cell stimulation for system identification.ConclusionWe have applied the proposed approach to the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor pathway and we observed that it minimises the amount of parametric uncertainty associated to the identified model. A statistical framework based on Monte-Carlo estimations of the uncertainty ellipsoid confirmed the superiority of optimally designed experiments over canonical inputs. The proposed approach can be easily extended to multiobjective formulations that can also take advantage of identifiability analysis. Moreover, the availability of fully automated microfluidic platforms explicitly developed for the task of biochemical model identification will hopefully reduce the effects of the 'data rich-data poor' paradox in Systems Biology.

[1]  R. Breitling,et al.  Current challenges in quantitative modeling of epidermal growth factor signaling , 2005, FEBS letters.

[2]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  Computational modeling of the EGF-receptor system: a paradigm for systems biology. , 2003, Trends in cell biology.

[3]  C. Cobelli,et al.  Structural identifiability of strongly connected biological compartmental systems , 1975, Medical and biological engineering.

[4]  E. Gilles,et al.  Computational modeling of the dynamics of the MAP kinase cascade activated by surface and internalized EGF receptors , 2002, Nature Biotechnology.

[5]  Jens Timmer,et al.  Data-based identifiability analysis of non-linear dynamical models , 2007, Bioinform..

[6]  Tom Misteli,et al.  Kinetic modelling approaches to in vivo imaging , 2001, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[7]  Jerome T. Mettetal,et al.  The Frequency Dependence of Osmo-Adaptation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2008, Science.

[8]  Raman K. Mehra,et al.  Optimal input signals for parameter estimation in dynamic systems--Survey and new results , 1974 .

[9]  Christopher R. Myers,et al.  Universally Sloppy Parameter Sensitivities in Systems Biology Models , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[10]  Martin Guay,et al.  The question of parameter identifiability for biochemical reaction networks considering the NF- κB signal transduction pathway , 2007 .

[11]  Todd Thorsen,et al.  Microfluidic technologies for high-throughput screening applications , 2003 .

[12]  Eduardo Sontag,et al.  Untangling the wires: A strategy to trace functional interactions in signaling and gene networks , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  D. Beebe,et al.  Microenvironment design considerations for cellular scale studies. , 2004, Lab on a chip.

[14]  Steven P. Asprey,et al.  On the design of optimally informative dynamic experiments for model discrimination in multiresponse nonlinear situations , 2003 .

[15]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  Time-resolved Mass Spectrometry of Tyrosine Phosphorylation Sites in the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Signaling Network Reveals Dynamic Modules*S , 2005, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[16]  Natal A. W. van Riel,et al.  Dynamic modelling and analysis of biochemical networks: mechanism-based models and model-based experiments , 2006, Briefings Bioinform..

[17]  E.D. Sontag,et al.  Molecular Systems Biology and Control: A Qualitative-Quantitative Approach , 2005, Proceedings of the 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[18]  S. Smith‐Gill,et al.  Experimental design for analysis of complex kinetics using surface plasmon resonance. , 2000, Methods.

[19]  William Thies,et al.  Abstraction layers for scalable microfluidic biocomputing , 2008, Natural Computing.

[20]  Angelo Paradiso,et al.  The complexity of targeting EGFR signalling in cancer: from expression to turnover. , 2006, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[21]  Y. Yarden,et al.  Untangling the ErbB signalling network , 2001, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[22]  Peter K. Sorger,et al.  MICROFLUIDIC DEVICES FOR STUDYING THE RESPONSE OF ADHERENT CELLS UNDER SHORT TIME STIMULI TREATMENT , 2007 .

[23]  Adam Arkin,et al.  On the deduction of chemical reaction pathways from measurements of time series of concentrations. , 2001, Chaos.

[24]  Florian Steinke,et al.  Experimental design for efficient identification of gene regulatory networks using sparse Bayesian models , 2006, BMC Systems Biology.

[25]  J. Ross,et al.  Determination of causal connectivities of species in reaction networks , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  F. Doyle,et al.  A benchmark for methods in reverse engineering and model discrimination: problem formulation and solutions. , 2004, Genome research.

[27]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Robust design of biological experiments , 2005, NIPS.

[28]  Raymond P Perez,et al.  New targets and challenges in the molecular therapeutics of cancer. , 2006, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[29]  M. Mann,et al.  Global, In Vivo, and Site-Specific Phosphorylation Dynamics in Signaling Networks , 2006, Cell.

[30]  Christopher R. Myers,et al.  Optimal experimental design in an EGFR signaling and down-regulation model , 2006, q-bio/0610024.

[31]  Maria Pia Saccomani,et al.  DAISY: A new software tool to test global identifiability of biological and physiological systems , 2007, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[32]  Ursula Klingmüller,et al.  Simulation Methods for Optimal Experimental Design in Systems Biology , 2003, Simul..

[33]  Hong Wang,et al.  Insights into the behaviour of systems biology models from dynamic sensitivity and identifiability analysis: a case study of an NF-kappaB signalling pathway. , 2006, Molecular bioSystems.

[34]  B. Kholodenko,et al.  Quantification of Short Term Signaling by the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor* , 1999, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[35]  S. Quake,et al.  Microfluidics: Fluid physics at the nanoliter scale , 2005 .

[36]  Shiyan Hu.  Optimal time points sampling in pathway modelling , 2004, The 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[37]  Bernt Wennberg,et al.  Identifiability of the time-lag parameter in delay systems with applications in systems biology , 2007 .

[38]  Douglas A. Wolfe,et al.  Nonparametric Statistical Methods , 1973 .

[39]  Julio R. Banga,et al.  Novel metaheuristic for parameter estimation in nonlinear dynamic biological systems , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[40]  J. Banga,et al.  Computational procedures for optimal experimental design in biological systems. , 2008, IET systems biology.

[41]  K. McDonald,et al.  Optimal dynamic experiments for bioreactor model discrimination , 1995, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[42]  G. Whitesides,et al.  Applications of microfluidics in chemical biology. , 2006, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[43]  Claudio Cobelli,et al.  Structural Identifiability of Biological Compartmental Systems , 1975, Optimization Techniques.

[44]  Luc Pronzato,et al.  Optimal experimental design and some related control problems , 2008, Autom..

[45]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  System Identification: Theory for the User , 1987 .

[46]  Adam Arkin,et al.  Response experiments for nonlinear systems with application to reaction kinetics and genetics. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  F. Bruggeman,et al.  Cancer: a Systems Biology disease. , 2006, Bio Systems.

[48]  Jeremy Gunawardena,et al.  MICROFLUIDIC TEMPORAL CELL STIMULATION , 2008 .

[49]  W. Näther.  Optimum experimental designs , 1994 .

[50]  Jeremy Gunawardena,et al.  Signals and Systems: Towards a Systems Biology of Signal Transduction , 2008, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[51]  김삼묘,et al.  “Bioinformatics” 특집을 내면서 , 2000 .

[52]  Jan F. M. Van Impe,et al.  Optimal dynamic experiment design for estimation of microbial growth kinetics at sub-optimal temperatures: Modes of implementation , 2005, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.

[53]  Ralf Takors,et al.  Application of model discriminating experimental design for modeling and development of a fermentative fed-batch L-valine production process. , 2005, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[54]  James A. Foster,et al.  Computational complexity and the genetic algorithm , 2001 .

[55]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Identification: Experiment Design , 1992, Concise Encyclopedia of Modelling & Simulation.

[56]  Luke P. Lee,et al.  Microfluidics-based systems biology. , 2006, Molecular bioSystems.

[57]  Drew Endy,et al.  Stimulus Design for Model Selection and Validation in Cell Signaling , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[58]  Blagoy Blagoev,et al.  A proteomics strategy to elucidate functional protein-protein interactions applied to EGF signaling , 2003, Nature Biotechnology.

[59]  John Paul Urbanski,et al.  Application of microfluidic emulsion technology to biochemistry, drug delivery and Lab-on-a-Chip programmability , 2005 .

[60]  Shuichi Takayama,et al.  Selective chemical treatment of cellular microdomains using multiple laminar streams. , 2003, Chemistry & biology.

[61]  Yosef Yarden,et al.  Neuregulins and Their Receptors: A Versatile Signaling Module in Organogenesis and Oncogenesis , 1997, Neuron.

[62]  Mehmet Toner,et al.  Microfluidic flow-encoded switching for parallel control of dynamic cellular microenvironments. , 2008, Lab on a chip.

[63]  Eduardo D. Sontag,et al.  Inferring dynamic architecture of cellular networks using time series of gene expression, protein and metabolite data , 2004, Bioinform..

[64]  William Thies,et al.  Abstraction Layers for Scalable Microfluidic Biocomputers , 2006, DNA.

[65]  Jens Timmer,et al.  Dynamical modeling and multi-experiment fitting with PottersWheel , 2008, Bioinform..

[66]  Sandro Macchietto,et al.  Model-based design of experiments for parameter precision: State of the art , 2008 .

[67]  R. Heinrich,et al.  Control of MAPK signalling: from complexity to what really matters , 2005, Oncogene.

[68]  Sandro Macchietto,et al.  Designing robust optimal dynamic experiments , 2002 .

[69]  Jürgen Kurths,et al.  Observing and Interpreting Correlations in Metabolic Networks , 2003, Bioinform..

[70]  John Mendelsohn,et al.  The EGF receptor family as targets for cancer therapy , 2000, Oncogene.

[71]  Fergal P Casey,et al.  Prediction and Optimal Experimental Design in Systems Biology Models , 2006 .

[72]  H. Kitano,et al.  A comprehensive pathway map of epidermal growth factor receptor signaling , 2005, Molecular systems biology.

[73]  Mudita Singhal,et al.  COPASI - a COmplex PAthway SImulator , 2006, Bioinform..

[74]  Kwang-Hyun Cho,et al.  Experimental Design in Systems Biology, Based on Parameter Sensitivity Analysis Using a Monte Carlo Method: A Case Study for the TNFα-Mediated NF-κ B Signal Transduction Pathway , 2003, Simul..