Parametric sensitivity analysis for biochemical reaction networks based on pathwise information theory

BMC Bioinformatics

Dionisios G Vlachos²  Markos A Katsoulakis¹  Yannis Pantazis¹ 

[1]Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01002, USA

[2]Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, 19716, USA

关键词: EGFR model;    p53 model;    Pathwise Fisher information matrix;    Relative entropy rate;    Sensitivity analysis;    Biochemical reaction networks;   

Others  :  1087725
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2105-14-311

 received in 2013-04-09, accepted in 2013-10-05,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Stochastic modeling and simulation provide powerful predictive methods for the intrinsic understanding of fundamental mechanisms in complex biochemical networks. Typically, such mathematical models involve networks of coupled jump stochastic processes with a large number of parameters that need to be suitably calibrated against experimental data. In this direction, the parameter sensitivity analysis of reaction networks is an essential mathematical and computational tool, yielding information regarding the robustness and the identifiability of model parameters. However, existing sensitivity analysis approaches such as variants of the finite difference method can have an overwhelming computational cost in models with a high-dimensional parameter space.

Results

We develop a sensitivity analysis methodology suitable for complex stochastic reaction networks with a large number of parameters. The proposed approach is based on Information Theory methods and relies on the quantification of information loss due to parameter perturbations between time-series distributions. For this reason, we need to work on path-space, i.e., the set consisting of all stochastic trajectories, hence the proposed approach is referred to as “pathwise”. The pathwise sensitivity analysis method is realized by employing the rigorously-derived Relative Entropy Rate, which is directly computable from the propensity functions. A key aspect of the method is that an associated pathwise Fisher Information Matrix (FIM) is defined, which in turn constitutes a gradient-free approach to quantifying parameter sensitivities. The structure of the FIM turns out to be block-diagonal, revealing hidden parameter dependencies and sensitivities in reaction networks.

Conclusions

As a gradient-free method, the proposed sensitivity analysis provides a significant advantage when dealing with complex stochastic systems with a large number of parameters. In addition, the knowledge of the structure of the FIM can allow to efficiently address questions on parameter identifiability, estimation and robustness. The proposed method is tested and validated on three biochemical systems, namely: (a) a protein production/degradation model where explicit solutions are available, permitting a careful assessment of the method, (b) the p53 reaction network where quasi-steady stochastic oscillations of the concentrations are observed, and for which continuum approximations (e.g. mean field, stochastic Langevin, etc.) break down due to persistent oscillations between high and low populations, and (c) an Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor model which is an example of a high-dimensional stochastic reaction network with more than 200 reactions and a corresponding number of parameters.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Pantazis et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Barkai N, Leibler S: Robustness in simple biochemical networks. Nature 1997, 387(6636):913-917.
• [2]Csete M, Doyle J: Reverse engineering of biological complexity. Science 2002, 295(5560):1664-1669.
• [3]Kitano H: Opinion - Cancer as a robust system: implications for anticancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer 2004, 4(3):227-235.
• [4]Donz A, Fanchon E, Gattepaille L, Maler O, Tracqui P: Robustness analysis and behavior discrimination in enzymatic reaction networks. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:1-16.
• [5]Hart Y, Antebi Y, Mayo A, Friedman N, Alon U: Design principles of cell circuits with paradoxical components. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA (PNAS) 2012, 109(21):8346-8351.
• [6]Glynn P: Likelihood ratio gradient estimation for stochastic systems. Commun ACM 1990, 33(10):75-84.
• [7]Nakayama M, Goyal A, Glynn PW: Likelihood ratio sensitivity analysis for Markovian models of highly dependable systems. Stochastic Models 1994, 10:701-717.
• [8]Plyasunov S, Arkin AP: Efficient stochastic sensitivity analysis of discrete event systems. J Comp Phys 2007, 221:724-738.
• [9]Kim D, Debusschere B, Najm H: Spectral methods for parametric sensitivity in stochastic dynamical systems. Biophys J 2007, 92:379-393.
• [10]Rathinam M, Sheppard PW, Khammash M: Efficient computation of parameter sensitivities of discrete stochastic chemical reaction networks. J Chem Phys 2010, 132(034103):1-13.
• [11]Anderson DF: An efficient finite difference method for parameter sensitivities of continuous-time Markov chains. SIAM J Numerical Anal 2012, 50(5):2237-2258.
• [12]Sheppard P, Rathinam M, Khammash M: A pathwise derivative approach to the computation of parameter sensitivities in discrete stochastic chemical systems. J Chem Phys 2012., 136(034115)
• [13]McGill JA, Ogunnaike BA, Vlachos DG: Efficient gradient estimation using finite differencing and likelihood ratios for kinetic Monte Carlo simulations. J Comp Phys 2012, 231(21):7170-7186.
• [14]Liu H, Chen W, Sudjianto A: Relative entropy based method for probabilistic sensitivity analysis in engineering design. J Mech Design 2006, 128:326-336.
• [15]Lüdtke N, Panzeri S, Brown M, Broomhead DS, Knowles J, Montemurro MA, Kell DB: Information-theoretic sensitivity analysis: a general method for credit assignment in complex networks. J R Soc Interface 2008, 5:223-235.
• [16]Majda AJ, Gershgorin B: Quantifying uncertainty in climate change science through empirical information theory. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2010, 107(34):14958-14963.
• [17]Majda AJ, Gershgorin B: Improving model fidelity and sensitivity for complex systems through empirical information theory. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2011, 108(25):10044-10049.
• [18]Komorowski M, Costa MJ, Rand DA, Stumpf MPH: Sensitivity, robustness, and identifiability in stochastic chemical kinetics models. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011, 108:8645-8650.
• [19]Pantazis Y, Katsoulakis M: A relative entropy rate method for path space sensitivity analysis of stationary complex stochastic dynamics. J Chem Phys 2013, 138(5):054115.
• [20]Gillespie DT: Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions. J Chem Phys 1977, 81:2340-2361.
• [21]Chatterjee A, Vlachos DG: An overview of spatial microscopic and accelerated kinetic Monte Carlo methods for materials’ simulation. J Comput Aided Mater Design 2007, 14(2):253-308.
• [22]Slepoy A, Thompson A, Plimpton S: A constant-time kinetic Monte Carlo algorithm for simulation of large biochemical reaction networks. J Chem Phys 2008, 128(20):205101.
• [23]Gibson MA, Bruck J: Efficient exact stochastic simulation of chemical systems with many species and many channels. J Chem Phys 2000, 104:1876-1889.
• [24]Gillespie DT: Approximated accelerated stochastic simulation of chemically reacting systems. J Chem Phys 2001, 115(4):1716-1733.
• [25]Gillespie DT: The chemical Langevin equation. J Chem Phys 2000, 113:297-306.
• [26]Rathinam M, Petzold LR, Cao Y, Gillespie DT: Stiffness in stochastic chemically reacting systems: The implicit tau-leaping method. J Chem Phys 2003, 119:12784-12794.
• [27]Chatterjee A, Vlachos DG, Katsoulakis MA: Binomial distribution based tau-leap accelerated stochastic simulation. J Chem Phys 2005, 122:024112.
• [28]Geva-Zatorsky N, Rosenfeld N, Itzkovitz S, Milo R, Sigal A, Dekel E, Yarnitzky T, Liron Y, Polak P, Lahav G, Alon U: Oscillations and variability in the p53 system. Mol Syst Biol 2006, 2:0033.
• [29]Moghal N, Sternberg P: Multiple positive and negative regulators of signaling by the EGF receptor. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1999, 11:190-196.
• [30]Hackel P, Zwick E, Prenzel N, Ullrich A: Epidermal growth factor receptors: critical mediators of multiple receptor pathways. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1999, 11:184-189.
• [31]Schoeberl B, Eichler-Jonsson C, Gilles E, Muller G: Computational modeling of the dynamics of the MAP kinase cascade activated by surface and internalized EGF receptors. Nat Biotechnol 2002, 20:370-375.
• [32]Kullback S: Information Theory and Statistics. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1959.
• [33]Cover TM, Thomas JA: Elements of Information Theory.. Wiley Series in Telecommunications; 1991.
• [34]Kipnis C, Landim C: Scaling Limits of Interacting Particle Systems. Berlin, Heidelberg and New York: Springer-Verlag; 1999.
• [35]Avellaneda M, Friedman C, Holmes R, Samperi D: Calibrating volatility surfaces via relative entropy minimization. Soc Sci Res Netw 1997. Available at SSRN: [http://ssrn.com/abstract=648 webcite]
• [36]Dumitrescu ME: Some informational properties of Markov pure-jump processes. C P Matematiky 1988, 113:429-434.
• [37]Emery AF, Nenarokomov AV: Optimal experiment design. Meas Sci Technol 1998, 9:864-876.
• [38]Gutenkunst RN, Waterfall JJ, Casey FP, Brown KS, Myers CR, Sethna JP: Universally sloppy parameter sensitivities in systems biology models. PLOS Comput Biol 2007, 3:1871-1878.
• [39]Chowdhary K, Dupuis P: Distinguishing and integrating aleatoric and epistemic variation in uncertainty quantification. ESAIM Math Model Numerical Anal 2013, 47:635-662.
• [40]Wilkinson DJ: Stochastic Modelling for Systems Biology.. Chapman & Hall; 2012.
• [41]Kay SM: Funtamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation Theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1993.
• [42]Wasserman L: All of Statistics: A Concise Course in Statistical Inference.. Springer; 2004.
• [43]Rothenberg T: Identification in parametric models. CONOMETRICA 1971, 39:577-0591.
• [44]Marangoni AG: Enzyme Kinetics: A Modern Approach.. Wiley Interscience; 2003.
• [45]Gillespie DT: A general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evolution of coupled chemical reactions. J Comp Phys 1976, 22:403-434.
• [46]Gardiner C: Handbook of Stochastic Methods: for Physics, Chemistry and the Natural Sciences.. Springer; 1985.
• [47]van Kampen NG: Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry.. North Holland; 2006.
• [48]Kurtz TG: The relationship between stochastic and deterministic models for chemical reactions. J Chem Phys 1972, 57:2976.
• [49]Cao Y, Gillespie DT, Petzold LR: Efficient step size selection for the tau-leaping simulation method. J Chem Phys 2006, 124:044109.
• [50]Tian T, Burrage K: Binomial leap methods for simulating stochastic chemical kinetics. J Chem Phys 2004, 121:10356.
• [51]Kurtz TG: Approximation of Population Processes, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM). 1981.
• [52]Doering CR, Sargsyan KV, Sander LM, Vanden-Eijnden E: Asymptotics of rare events in birth–death processes bypassing the exact solutions. J Phys Condens Matter 2007, 19(065145):1-12.
• [53]Hanggi P, Grabert H, Talkner P, Thomas H: Bistable systems: Master equation versus Fokker-Planck modeling. Phys Rev A 1984, 29:371-378.
• [54]Wilkinson DJ: Stochastic modelling for quantitative description of heterogeneous biological systems. Nat Rev Genet 2009, 10:122-133.
• [55]Thattai M, van Oudenaarden A: Intrinsic noise in gene regulatory networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2001, 98(15):8614-8619. [http://www.pnas.org/content/98/15/8614.abstract webcite]
• [56]Prives C: Signaling to p53: breaking the MDM2-p53 circuit. Cell 1998, 95:5-8.
• [57]Harris S, Levine A: The p53 pathway: positive and negative feedback loops. Oncogene 2005, 24:899-908.
• [58]Katsoulakis MA, Majda AJ, Sopasakis A: Intermittency, metastability and coarse graining for coupled deterministic-stochastic lattice systems. Nonlinearity 2006, 19(5):1021-1047.
• [59]Komorowski M, Zurauskiene J, Stumpf M: StochSens–Matlab package for sensitivity analysis of stochastic chemical systems. Bioinformatics 2012, 28:731-733.
• [60]Sibilia M, Steinbach J, Stingl L, Aguzzi A, Wagner E: A strain-independent postnatal neurodegeneration in mice lacking the EGF receptor. EMBO J 1998, 17:719-731.
• [61]Kim H, Muller W: The role of the EGF receptor family in tumorigenesis and metastasis. Exp Cell Res 1999, 253:78-87.