↓ Skip to main content

Uncertainty Quantification Reveals the Importance of Data Variability and Experimental Design Considerations for in Silico Proarrhythmia Risk Assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Uncertainty Quantification Reveals the Importance of Data Variability and Experimental Design Considerations for in Silico Proarrhythmia Risk Assessment
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00917
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly C. Chang, Sara Dutta, Gary R. Mirams, Kylie A. Beattie, Jiansong Sheng, Phu N. Tran, Min Wu, Wendy W. Wu, Thomas Colatsky, David G. Strauss, Zhihua Li

Abstract

The Comprehensive in vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) is a global initiative intended to improve drug proarrhythmia risk assessment using a new paradigm of mechanistic assays. Under the CiPA paradigm, the relative risk of drug-induced Torsade de Pointes (TdP) is assessed using an in silico model of the human ventricular action potential (AP) that integrates in vitro pharmacology data from multiple ion channels. Thus, modeling predictions of cardiac risk liability will depend critically on the variability in pharmacology data, and uncertainty quantification (UQ) must comprise an essential component of the in silico assay. This study explores UQ methods that may be incorporated into the CiPA framework. Recently, we proposed a promising in silico TdP risk metric (qNet), which is derived from AP simulations and allows separation of a set of CiPA training compounds into Low, Intermediate, and High TdP risk categories. The purpose of this study was to use UQ to evaluate the robustness of TdP risk separation by qNet. Uncertainty in the model parameters used to describe drug binding and ionic current block was estimated using the non-parametric bootstrap method and a Bayesian inference approach. Uncertainty was then propagated through AP simulations to quantify uncertainty in qNet for each drug. UQ revealed lower uncertainty and more accurate TdP risk stratification by qNet when simulations were run at concentrations below 5× the maximum therapeutic exposure (Cmax). However, when drug effects were extrapolated above 10× Cmax, UQ showed that qNet could no longer clearly separate drugs by TdP risk. This was because for most of the pharmacology data, the amount of current block measured was <60%, preventing reliable estimation of IC50-values. The results of this study demonstrate that the accuracy of TdP risk prediction depends both on the intrinsic variability in ion channel pharmacology data as well as on experimental design considerations that preclude an accurate determination of drug IC50-values in vitro. Thus, we demonstrate that UQ provides valuable information about in silico modeling predictions that can inform future proarrhythmic risk evaluation of drugs under the CiPA paradigm.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 30%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 19 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 11 15%
Computer Science 8 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 21 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,347,516
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#2,973
of 13,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,264
of 437,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#94
of 339 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 437,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 339 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.