Modeling network dynamics of cardiac right atrial ganglionic plexus to enable in silico testing of vagal neurostimulation strategies

Investigators
Rajanikanth Vadigepalli, James Schwaber, William Lytton
Contact info (email)
rajanikanth.vadigepalli@jefferson.edu
1. Define context(s)
identify/explore new therapies
reveal new biological insights
Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Comprehensive
Primary goal of the model/tool/database

The primary goal of the model is to quantitatively account for the neuronal network activity in the intrinsic cardiac nervous system (ICN) to inform bioelectronic medicine and impact neuromodulation therapy developments for interventions in heart disease.

Biological domain of the model
intrinsic cardiac nervous system
Structure(s) of interest in the model
intrinsic cardiac nervous system; neurons; right atrial ganglionic plexus; heart
Spatial scales included in the model
ion channels; signaling; neurons; neuronal networks
Time scales included in the model
milliseconds; seconds; minutes
Additional comments about the model’s context (optional)

Studies of the local intrinsic cardiac nervous system have revealed its significance and complexity, but yielding so far a fragmented picture that leaves gaps that cannot be addressed by experiments alone towards functional predictions for control of the system. Prior modeling efforts, including our own, have had to work within these limitations. Recently the SPARC initiative has supported comprehensive study of the ICN to provide foundational data to allow modeling that supports functional prediction and control more feasible. These rich datasets on ICN are cross species (rat and pig), include male and female, and have multiple replicates to account for variability and uncertainties including off target effects. The unmet need now is to build on the opportunity for an integrative multiscale model (MSM) of the circuit to integrate this patchwork into a functional whole foundational to determining control points for interventions. The MSM will provide quantitative and dynamic accounting of the signal processing and adaptation dynamics of this local nervous system intrinsic to the heart. The newly available foundational neuroanatomical, physiological and molecular information on the ICN now support MSM to scale single neuron and molecular phenotype data to have ICN networks and cardiac functional impact. We will use MSM modeling to close the gap between these data and ICN functions, supporting exploration of how this system drives cardiac dynamics. This will enable our simulations to predict organ-scale functional consequences of vagal neurostimulation with high fidelity, immediately opening avenues for in silico testing and in vivo and clinical confirmation of neuromodulatory control algorithms.

2. Data for building and validating the model
Data for building the model Published? Private? How is credibility checked? Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
in vitro (primary cells cell, lines, etc.)
ex vivo (excised tissues)
in vivo pre-clinical (lower-level organism or small animal) Yes Yes (SPARC) SPARC DRC Curation Extensive/Adequate
in vivo pre-clinical (large animal) Yes Yes (SPARC) SPARC DRC Curation Extensive/Adequate
Human subjects/clinical
Other: ________________________
Data for validating the model Published? Private? How is credibility checked? Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
in vitro (primary cells cell, lines, etc.)
ex vivo (excised tissues)
in vivo pre-clinical (lower-level organism or small animal) Yes Yes (SPARC) SPARC DRC Curation Extensive/Adequate
in vivo pre-clinical (large animal) Yes Yes (SPARC) SPARC DRC Curation Extensive/Adequate
Human subjects/clinical
Other: ________________________
3. Validate within context(s)
Who does it? When does it happen? How is it done? Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Verification Project team and Third-party reviewer Quarterly Qualitative Adequate
Validation Project team Post 2-year project New experiments Adequate
Uncertainty quantification Project team During modeling process Alternative randomizations Adequate
Sensitivity analysis Model developer During modeling process Established techniques Adequate
Other:__________
Additional Comments
4. Limitations
Disclaimer statement (explain key limitations) Who needs to know about this disclaimer? How is this disclaimer shared with that audience? Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Lack of dendritic processing Cardiovascular disease researchers Description in the publications Adequate
Lack of detailed network connectivity Cardiovascular disease researchers Description in the publications Adequate
5. Version control
Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Adequate
Naming Conventions? Repository? Code Review?
individual modeler Yes Github Independent peer cross-check
within the lab Yes Github Independent peer cross-check
collaborators Yes Github Independent peer cross-check
6. Documentation
Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Code commented? Extensive
Scope and intended use described? Comprehensive
User’s guide? Adequate
Developer’s guide? Adequate
7. Dissemination
Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Comprehensive
Target Audience(s): “Inner circle” Scientific community Public
Simulations Github Github; Manuscripts; O2S2PARC Github; Manuscripts; O2S2PARC
Models Github Github; Manuscripts; O2S2PARC Github; Manuscripts; O2S2PARC
Software Github Github; O2S2PARC Github; O2S2PARC
Results Github; Manuscripts Github; Manuscripts Github; Manuscripts
Implications of results Manuscripts Manuscripts Manuscripts; Institutional Newsletters
8. Independent reviews
Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Adequate
Reviewer(s) name & affiliation: Guy Kember, Dalhousie University
When was review performed? Expected to be performed Quarterly after initial set of models were developed
How was review performed and outcomes of the review? Pending; Ongoing discussions to setup the reviews
9. Test competing implementations
Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Adequate
Yes or No (briefly summarize)
Were competing implementations tested? Yes
Did this lead to model refinement or improvement? Expected; Model components selected from different options for ion channel conductance kinetics
10. Conform to standards
Current Conformance Level / Target Conformance Level
Adequate
Yes or No (briefly summarize)
Are there operating procedures, guidelines, or standards for this type of multiscale modeling? Yes
How do your modeling efforts conform? Use of standard integrators and simulators