Introduction to Population Balance Modeling Spring 2007.

Introduction to Population Balance Modeling

Spring 2007

Topics

• Modeling Philosophies– Where Population Balance Models (PBMs) fit in

• Important Characteristics

• Framework

• Uses– Cancer Examples

• Parameter Identification

• Potential Applications

Variations of Scale

• Tumor scale properties– Physical characteristics– Disease class

• Cellular level– Growth and death rates– Mutation rates

• Subcellular characteristics– Genetic profile– Reaction networks (metabol- and prote-omics)– CD markers

M.-F. Noirot-Gros, Et. Dervyn, L. J. Wu, P. Mervelet, J. Errington, S. D. Ehrlich, and P. Noirot (2002) An expanded view of bacterial DNA replication . Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99(12): 8342-8347.

Steel 1977

Level of Model Detail – Population Growth

• Empirical Models– Course structure– Averaged cell behavior– Gompertz growth

• Mechanistic Models– Fine structure– Cdc/Cdk interactions

• Population Balance Models– “key” parameters (i.e. DNA, volume, age)– Details are lumped and averaged– Heterogeneous behavior

Model Detail

State vector

• Completely averaged– X = [ ]

• Few state variables– X = [size spatial_location internal_drug_level]

• More mechanistic– X = [Cdk1 CycA CycE…]

• Population Balance– Expected distribution among cells

Population Balance Model Requirements

• Advantages– Simplified description

of system– Flexible framework

• Disadvantages– Proper identification of

system (Burundi not the same as Denmark)

– Identification of rates

• Transition rates (e.g. division rate)

• Rates of change – growth rates

• Constitutive model or experiments

, 1 2 3( , , )i j x x x

1 2 3( , , , )x x xX y

Modeling Philosophies

• Birth and death rates – Empirical– PBM – vary with age and country– Mechanistic – need to know the causes behind age-dependence

Hjortsø 2005

Expected Number Density

• Distribution of cell states

• Total number density

1 1

1 1

( , ; ) ( , ; ) ( , )

( , ; , ; ) ( , ; , ; ) ( , ) '

b

a

d b

c a

E N a b t N a b t n x t dx

E N a b c d t N a b c d t n x t dxdx

2 discrete states (i.e. Denmark)

1 continuous variable (i.e. age)

2 continuous variables

(i.e. age and weight)

010

2030

40

0

10

20

30

40

0

2

4

6

8

Age - cell 1 (hrs)

Multi-dimensional number density

Age - cell 2 (hrs)N

um

be

r D

en

sity

Population Description

• Continuous variables• Time• Cell

– Mass– Volume– Age– DNA or RNA– Protein

• Patient– Age

• Discrete indices• Cell

– Cell cycle phase– Genetic mutations– Differentiation state

• Patient– M / F– Race / ethnicity

Example – Cell Cycle Specific Behaviors

• Cell cycle specific drug– Discrete – cell cycle phase, p– Continuous – age, τ, (time since last transition)

•

(3, )

Phase 1G0/G1

Phase 2S

Phase 3G2/M

1( , , )n p t

(1, ) (2, )

k

Cell Cycle Control (Tyson and Novak 2004)

Cell cycle arrest (Tao et al. 2003)

PBMs in biological settings

• Cell cycle-specific chemo

• Budding yeast dynamics

• Rate of monoclonal antibody production in hybridoma cells

• Bioreactor productivity under changing substrate conditions

• Ecological models– Predator-prey

Topics



• Framework




• Tumor scale properties– Physical characteristics– Disease class

• Cellular level– Growth and death rates– Mutation rates

• Subcellular characteristics– Genetic profile– Reaction networks (metabol- and prote-omics)– CD markers

Variations of Scale

Modeling Philosophies

• Birth and death rates – Empirical– PBM – vary with age and country (STATE VECTOR)– Mechanistic – need to know the causes behind age-dependence

Hjortsø 2005

Population Balance Model Requirements

• Advantages– Simplified description

of system– Flexible framework

• Disadvantages– Proper identification of

system (Burundi not the same as Denmark)

– Identification of rates

• Transition rates (e.g. division and rates)

• Rates of change – growth rates

• Constitutive model or experiments

, 1 2 3( , , )i j x x x

1 2 3( , , , )x x xX y

Cell Cycle Control (Tyson and Novak 2004)

Changes Number Density• Changes in cell states

• Cell behavior (growth, division and death, and phase transitions) are functions of a cell’s state

x

n1(x,t)

Population Balance – pure growth

b

a

b

adxtxntxX

xdxtxn

t),(),(),( 11

),(),(),(),(),( 111 tbXtbntaXtandxtxndt

d b

a

( , ) ( , )n a t X a t ( , ) ( , )n b t X b t

( )x a ( )x bdx

1( , )n x t

x

Growth rate 0),(),(),(

11

txntxX

xt

txn

Transitions between discrete states

1,1,1

1,11,1

1 ),,1(),(),,(),,(),,1(),,1(),,1(

ii

ii txntxtxintxitxntxX

xt

txn

1(1, , ) (1, , )n a t X a t1(1, , ) (1, , )n b t X b t

( )x a ( )x b

1(1, , )n x t

x

Growth rate Transition rates

( )x a ( )x bdx

1(2, , )n x t

x

2,1 1( , ) (2, , )b

ax t n x t dx

Cell division and death

1( , ) ( , )b

ak x t n x t dx

1( , ) ( , )b

ax t n x t dx

),(),(),('),'(),'('2),(),(),(

1111 txntxktxdxtxntxxxPtxntxX

xt

txnx

( , ) ( , )n a t X a t ( , ) ( , )n b t X b t

( )x a ( )x b

1( , )n x t

x

Growth rate Division rate Death rate

12 ' ( ', ) ( ', ) 'b

a xP x x x t n x t dx dx

Mathematical ModelCellular -> Macroscopic

• Tumor size and character– Simulate cells and observe

bulk behavior

• Cell behavior– Mutations– Spatial effects– Cell cycle phase– Quiescence – Pharmacodynamics

• Mostly theoretical work– Occasionally some

parameters available

• Optimization of chemo– Dosage– Frequency– Drug combinations

• Solid tumor– Size limitations due to nutrients and

inhibitors

• Leukemia– Quiescent and proliferating

populations– Cell cycle-specific chemotherapy

• Mutations– Branching process

Growth Transition Rates

DeathTransition Rates

Treatment Evaluation

Stochastic Effects

Cancer Growth

Bone marrow model –In vitro CD34+ cultures

Stochastic Models

Cancer transition ratesIn vitro BrdU/Annexin V

Inverse Model

Inverse Model

Drug Concentrations

Bone MarrowPeriphery \

MCV MeasurementsMCV Measurements

Cancer Growth Model

Cancer Growth

Cancer Growth Model



Drug Concentrations




• (3, )

Phase 1G0/G1

Phase 2S

Phase 3G2/M

1( , , )n p t

(1, ) (2, )

k(C)

In vitro verification

• Total population dynamics

• Phase oscillations– Period– Amplitude– Dampening

• Co-culture of Jurkat and HL60 performed for selective treatment

Sherer et al. 2006

Use in Treatment Designs

Timing effectsTreatment Optimization

Heathy cells vs. cancerous

Drug Dosage

Administration Timings

Model ExtrapolationIn vivo factors

Drug half-life Activation of quiescent population in bone marrow

Age-averaged PBM

Gardner SN. “Modelling multi-drug chemotherapy: tailoring treatment to individuals.” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 214: 181-207, 2002.

Prognosis Tree

a < 0.01

If a<0.01 if a>0.01



Cancer Growth

Bone marrow model –In vitro CD34+ cultures

Inverse ModelDrug Concentrations

Bone MarrowPeriphery \

MCV MeasurementsMCV Measurements

Cancer Growth Model

Modeling a surrogate marker for the drug 6MP

• Bone marrow– 6MP inhibits DNA synthesis

• Blood stream– Red blood cells (RBCs) become larger– RBC size correlates with steady-state 6MP level

Blood Stream

Mature RBCsBone Marrow

Maturing~120 days

Stemcell reticulocyte

RBC Maturation

• Cell volume• DNA inhibition

– Time since division– DNA synthesis rateDNA synthesis rate

• Maturation– Discrete state

• Transferrin and glycophorin A

– ContinuousContinuous• Time spent in state

Hillman and Finch 1996

Forward Model (hypothetical)

• Days: 6TGN reaches steady-state (SS)

• Weeks: Marrow maturation in new SS

• Months: Periphery in new SS

0 50 100 150 200 250164

166

168

170

172

174

176

178

180

182

Time (days)

Pe

rip

he

ral M

CV

(fL

)

Drug Concentration Effects on MCV

0 mg/mL/day

50 mg/mL/day

100 mg/mL/day0 mg/mL/day extrapolate

50 mg/mL/day extrapolate

100 mg/mL/day extrapolate

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 300

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

Corpuscular Volume (fL/10)

Pro

ba

bili

ty D

istr

ibu

tio

n

Bone Marrow Corpuscular Volume Distributions

M = 0.25

M = 0.50M = 0.75

M = 1.00

MCV => Drug level

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 5000

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

0.014

0.016

0.018

0.02

6TGN level (pM)

Pro

ba

bili

ty

6TGN level with MCV

8184

87

90

93

9699

Topics



• Framework






• (3, )

Phase 1G0/G1

Phase 2S

Phase 3G2/M

1( , , )n p t

(1, ) (2, )

k(C)

In vitro verification

• Total population dynamics

• Phase oscillations– Period– Amplitude– Dampening

• Co-culture of Jurkat and HL60 performed for selective treatment

Age-averaged PBM

Gardner SN. “Modelling multi-drug chemotherapy: tailoring treatment to individuals.” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 214: 181-207, 2002.

Prognosis Tree

a < 0.01

If a<0.01 if a>0.01

Ramkrishna’s resonance chemotherapy model

• Hypothesis testing (potential protocols)

• Patient specific treatments

• Treatment strength necessary or desired

Cell Cycle Transitions Γ(1,τ)

• Cannot measure ages

• Balanced growth– Γ => age distributions– Predict dynamics

• BrdU– Labels S subpopulation– Phase transient amidst

balanced growth

• Match transition rates

TransitionRates

InitialCondition

Model Predictions

BrdU Experimental Data

ObjectiveFunction

Initial Condition

• Balanced growth

• Population increase

• Eigen analysis– Balanced growth age-distribution

0

1)(where)()(),( iiii fftNtn

0

1

0 0)(exp)(exp)( dDddDf out

iioutiii

)()(

tdt

tdDΝ

N

0

)()()( dfDDD joutij

inijij

TransitionRates

InitialCondition

Model Predictions

Unbalanced subpopulation growth amidst total population balance growth

BrdU Experimental Data

Cell Cycle Transition Rates

ΓG2/M

G0/G1 UL

G0/G1 L

S UL

S L

G2/M UL

G2/M LΓG0/G1 ΓS

BrdU

Labeling

(cell cycle)

8 hrs later

Transition Rates Residence Time Distribution

Sherer et al. 2007

Example – protein (p) structured cell cycle rates

Phase 1G0/G1

Ṗ(1,p)

Phase 2S

Ṗ(2,p)

Phase 3G2/M

Ṗ(3,p)

Γ(1,p) Γ(2,p)

Γ(3,p)

G0/G1 phase

S phase

G2/M phase high protein production

low protein production

Kromenaker and Srienc 1991

Rate Identification Procedure

• Assume balanced growth– Specific growth rate

• Measure– Stable cell cycle phase

protein distributions– Protein distributions at

transition

• Inverse model– Phase transition rates– Protein synthesis rates

Modeling a surrogate marker for the drug 6MP

• Bone marrow– 6MP inhibits DNA synthesis

• Blood stream– Red blood cells (RBCs) become larger– RBC size correlates with steady-state 6MP level

Blood Stream

Mature RBCsBone Marrow

Maturing~120 days

Stemcell reticulocyte

RBC Maturation

• Cell volume• DNA inhibition

– Time since division– DNA synthesis rateDNA synthesis rate

• Maturation– Discrete state

• Transferrin and glycophorin A

– ContinuousContinuous• Time spent in state

Maturation + division + growth rates

• Maturation– Tag cells in 1st stage

with pkh26– Track movement

• Division– Cell generations

• Growth– Satisfy volume

distributions

MCV => Drug level

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 5000

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

0.014

0.016

0.018

0.02

6TGN level (pM)

Pro

ba

bili

ty

6TGN level with MCV

8184

87

90

93

9699


• Actual cell behavior may be unobservable– Remission– Predictive models

• Model parameters known• Treatment constantly adjusted

– Immune system (Neutrophil count)– Toxic side effects

• Objective– Increase cure “rate”– Increase quality of life

• Quantitative comparison– Expected population– Likelihood of cure

Small number of cells• Uncertainty in timing of events

– Extrinsically stochastic– Average out if large number of cells– Greater variations if small number of cells

• Master probability density– Monte Carlo simulations– Cell number probability distribution

• Seminal cancerous cells

• Nearing “cure”

• Dependent upon transition rate functions

Cell number probability distribution & likelihood of cure

Sherer et al. 2007

Approximate treatment necessary to nearly ensure cure

• Small expected population– Small population mean

• Be certain that the population is small– Small standard deviation in number of cells

Patient Variability

Quiescence – importance of structure of transition rates

Introduction to Population Balance Modeling Spring 2007.

Documents

Transcript of Introduction to Population Balance Modeling Spring 2007.