Paper detail

Accounting for Randomness in Measurement and Sampling in Study of Cancer Cell Population Dynamics

Studying the development of malignant tumours, it is important to know and predict the proportions of different cell types in tissue samples. Knowing the expected temporal evolution of the proportion of normal tissue cells, compared to stem-like and non-stem like cancer cells, gives an indication about the progression of the disease and indicates the expected response to interventions with drugs. Such processes have been modeled using Markov processes. An essential step for the simulation of such models is then the determination of state transition probabilities. We here consider the experimentally more realistic scenario in which the measurement of cell population sizes is noisy, leading to a particular hidden Markov model. In this context, randomness in measurement is related to noisy measurements, which are used for the estimation of the transition probability matrix. Randomness in sampling, on the other hand, is here related to the error in estimating the state probability from small cell populations. Using aggregated data of fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) measurement, we develop a minimum mean square error estimator (MMSE) and maximum likelihood (ML) estimator and formulate two problems to find the minimum number of required samples and measurements to guarantee the accuracy of predicted population sizes using a transition probability matrix estimated from noisy data. We analyze the properties of two estimators for different noise distributions and prove an optimal solution for Gaussian distributions with the MMSE. Our numerical results show, that for noisy measurements the convergence mechanism of transition probabilities and steady states differ widely from the real values if one uses the standard deterministic approach in which measurements are assumed to be noise free.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.