Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34843457›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2021

Bayesian calibration of a stochastic, multiscale agent-based model for predicting in vitro tumor growth.

Ernesto A B F Lima, Danial Faghihi, Russell Philley, Jianchen Yang, John Virostko, Caleb M Phillips, Thomas E Yankeelov

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Challenges and opportunities in uncertainty quantification for healthcare and biological systems.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ernesto A B F LimaOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9219-8784
Danial FaghihiDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States of America.
Russell PhilleyOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9454-3086
Jianchen YangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
John VirostkoDepartment of Diagnostic Medicine, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3413-8801
Caleb M PhillipsOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0984-9305
Thomas E YankeelovOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
The University of Texas at Austin · USLivestrong Foundation · USUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · US

Funding

INTEGRATING OMICS AND QUANTITATIVE IMAGING DATA IN CO-CLINICAL TRIALS TO PREDICT TREATMENT RESPONSE IN TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCERU24CA226110 · NCI · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI LEWIS, MICHAEL T., RUBIN, DANIEL L · 2019 to 2023
$3.2M
Quantitative Multiscale Imaging to Optimize Cancer Treatment StrategiesR01CA186193 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI QUARANTA, VITO, RERICHA, ERIN C · 2014 to 2019
$3.1M
Image Driven Multi-Scale Modeling to Predict Treatment Response in Breast CancerU01CA174706 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI QUARANTA, VITO, YANKEELOV, THOMAS E · 2013 to 2018
$2.5M
Using label-free Raman microscopy to predict therapeutic resistance of TNBC cellsU01CA253540 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI BROCK, AMY, YANKEELOV, THOMAS E · 2020 to 2024
$2.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA186193NCI NIH HHS U01 CA174706NCI NIH HHS U01 CA253540NCI NIH HHS U24 CA226110
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hybrid multiscale agent-based models (ABMs) are unique in their ability to simulate individual cell interactions and microenvironmental dynamics. Unfortunately, the high computational cost of modeling individual cells, the inherent stochasticity of cell dynamics, and numerous model parameters are fundamental limitations of applying such models to predict tumor dynamics. To overcome these challenges, we have developed a coarse-grained two-scale ABM (cgABM) with a reduced parameter space that allows for an accurate and efficient calibration using a set of time-resolved microscopy measurements of cancer cells grown with different initial conditions. The multiscale model consists of a reaction-diffusion type model capturing the spatio-temporal evolution of glucose and growth factors in the tumor microenvironment (at tissue scale), coupled with a lattice-free ABM to simulate individual cell dynamics (at cellular scale). The experimental data consists of BT474 human breast carcinoma cells initialized with different glucose concentrations and tumor cell confluences. The confluence of live and dead cells was measured every three hours over four days. Given this model, we perform a time-dependent global sensitivity analysis to identify the relative importance of the model parameters. The subsequent cgABM is calibrated within a Bayesian framework to the experimental data to estimate model parameters, which are then used to predict the temporal evolution of the living and dead cell populations. To this end, a moment-based Bayesian inference is proposed to account for the stochasticity of the cgABM while quantifying uncertainties due to limited temporal observational data. The cgABM reduces the computational time of ABM simulations by 93% to 97% while staying within a 3% difference in prediction compared to ABM. Additionally, the cgABM can reliably predict the temporal evolution of breast cancer cells observed by the microscopy data with an average error and standard deviation for live and dead cells being 7.61±2.01 and 5.78±1.13, respectively.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalSystems AnalysisBayes TheoremBreast NeoplasmsCell DeathCell Line, TumorCell ProliferationCell SurvivalComputational BiologyComputer SimulationFemaleGlucoseHumansIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsLikelihood FunctionsSpatio-Temporal AnalysisGlucoseIntercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins

Identifiers

PMID34843457
PMCPMC8659698
OpenAlexW3217680342

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.