4.6 Article

Bayesian Active Learning for Drug Combinations

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
卷 60, 期 11, 页码 3248-3255

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2013.2272322

关键词

Drug combinations; expected improvement; Gaussian processes (GPs); hybrid Monte Carlo (HMC); particle filter

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dynamics of complex diseases are governed by intricate interactions of myriad factors. Drug combinations, formed by mixing several single-drug treatments at various doses, can enhance the effectiveness of the therapy by targeting multiple contributing factors. The main challenge in designing drug combinations is the highly nonlinear interaction of the constituent drugs. Prior work focused on guided space-exploratory heuristics that require discretization of drug doses. While being more efficient than random sampling, these methods are impractical if the drug space is high dimensional or if the drug sensitivity is unknown. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the obtained combinations may decrease if the resolution of the discretization grid is not sufficiently fine. In this paper, we model the biological system response to a continuous combination of drug doses by a Gaussian process (GP). We perform closed-loop experiments that rely on the expected improvement criterion to efficiently guide the exploration process toward drug combinations with the optimal response. When computing the criterion, we marginalize out the GP hyperparameters in a fully Bayesian manner using a particle filter. Finally, we employ a hybrid Monte Carlo algorithm to rapidly explore the high-dimensional continuous search space. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach on a fully factorial Drosophila dataset, an antiviral drug dataset for Herpes simplex virus type 1, and simulated human Apoptosis networks. The results show that our approach significantly reduces the number of required trials compared to existing methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据