Literature DB >> 34308471

bayesynergy: flexible Bayesian modelling of synergistic interaction effects in in vitro drug combination experiments.

Leiv Rønneberg1, Andrea Cremaschi2, Robert Hanes3,4, Jorrit M Enserink3,4,5, Manuela Zucknick1.   

Abstract

The effect of cancer therapies is often tested pre-clinically via in vitro experiments, where the post-treatment viability of the cancer cell population is measured through assays estimating the number of viable cells. In this way, large libraries of compounds can be tested, comparing the efficacy of each treatment. Drug interaction studies focus on the quantification of the additional effect encountered when two drugs are combined, as opposed to using the treatments separately. In the bayesynergy R package, we implement a probabilistic approach for the description of the drug combination experiment, where the observed dose response curve is modelled as a sum of the expected response under a zero-interaction model and an additional interaction effect (synergistic or antagonistic). Although the model formulation makes use of the Bliss independence assumption, we note that the posterior estimates of the dose-response surface can also be used to extract synergy scores based on other reference models, which we illustrate for the Highest Single Agent model. The interaction is modelled in a flexible manner, using a Gaussian process formulation. Since the proposed approach is based on a statistical model, it allows the natural inclusion of replicates, handles missing data and uneven concentration grids, and provides uncertainty quantification around the results. The model is implemented in the open-source Stan programming language providing a computationally efficient sampler, a fast approximation of the posterior through variational inference, and features parallel processing for working with large drug combination screens.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian; Gaussian process; dose–response; drug synergy; semi-parametric; viability assay

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34308471      PMCID: PMC8575029          DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbab251

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brief Bioinform        ISSN: 1467-5463            Impact factor:   11.622


  23 in total

1.  A Simple Statistical Parameter for Use in Evaluation and Validation of High Throughput Screening Assays.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Biomol Screen       Date:  1999

2.  A Bayesian approach to dose-response assessment and synergy and its application to in vitro dose-response studies.

Authors:  Violeta G Hennessey; Gary L Rosner; Robert C Bast; Min-Yu Chen
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Prediction of drug combination effects with a minimal set of experiments.

Authors:  Aleksandr Ianevski; Anil K Giri; Prson Gautam; Alexander Kononov; Swapnil Potdar; Jani Saarela; Krister Wennerberg; Tero Aittokallio
Journal:  Nat Mach Intell       Date:  2019-12-09

Review 4.  ATM Mutations in Cancer: Therapeutic Implications.

Authors:  Michael Choi; Thomas Kipps; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 6.261

5.  Chemical combination effects predict connectivity in biological systems.

Authors:  Joseph Lehár; Grant R Zimmermann; Andrew S Krueger; Raymond A Molnar; Jebediah T Ledell; Adrian M Heilbut; Glenn F Short; Leanne C Giusti; Garry P Nolan; Omar A Magid; Margaret S Lee; Alexis A Borisy; Brent R Stockwell; Curtis T Keith
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 11.429

6.  Dose-response modeling in high-throughput cancer drug screenings: an end-to-end approach.

Authors:  Wesley Tansey; Kathy Li; Haoran Zhang; Scott W Linderman; Raul Rabadan; David M Blei; Chris H Wiggins
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 5.279

7.  Dose-Response Analysis Using R.

Authors:  Christian Ritz; Florent Baty; Jens C Streibig; Daniel Gerhard
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-30       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Optimal experimental designs for dose-response studies with continuous endpoints.

Authors:  Tim Holland-Letz; Annette Kopp-Schneider
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 5.153

9.  Community assessment to advance computational prediction of cancer drug combinations in a pharmacogenomic screen.

Authors:  Michael P Menden; Dennis Wang; Mike J Mason; Bence Szalai; Krishna C Bulusu; Yuanfang Guan; Thomas Yu; Jaewoo Kang; Minji Jeon; Russ Wolfinger; Tin Nguyen; Mikhail Zaslavskiy; In Sock Jang; Zara Ghazoui; Mehmet Eren Ahsen; Robert Vogel; Elias Chaibub Neto; Thea Norman; Eric K Y Tang; Mathew J Garnett; Giovanni Y Di Veroli; Stephen Fawell; Gustavo Stolovitzky; Justin Guinney; Jonathan R Dry; Julio Saez-Rodriguez
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Statistical assessment and visualization of synergies for large-scale sparse drug combination datasets.

Authors:  Arnaud Amzallag; Sridhar Ramaswamy; Cyril H Benes
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review of computational methods for drug combination prediction.

Authors:  Weikaixin Kong; Gianmarco Midena; Yingjia Chen; Paschalis Athanasiadis; Tianduanyi Wang; Juho Rousu; Liye He; Tero Aittokallio
Journal:  Comput Struct Biotechnol J       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 6.155

2.  Non-parametric synergy modeling of chemical compounds with Gaussian processes.

Authors:  Yuliya Shapovalova; Tom Heskes; Tjeerd Dijkstra
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 3.169

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.