» Articles » PMID: 31493859

Four Ways to Fit an Ion Channel Model

Overview
Journal Biophys J
Publisher Cell Press
Specialty Biophysics
Date 2019 Sep 9
PMID 31493859
Citations 26
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Mathematical models of ionic currents are used to study the electrophysiology of the heart, brain, gut, and several other organs. Increasingly, these models are being used predictively in the clinic, for example, to predict the risks and results of genetic mutations, pharmacological treatments, or surgical procedures. These safety-critical applications depend on accurate characterization of the underlying ionic currents. Four different methods can be found in the literature to fit voltage-sensitive ion channel models to whole-cell current measurements: method 1, fitting model equations directly to time-constant, steady-state, and I-V summary curves; method 2, fitting by comparing simulated versions of these summary curves to their experimental counterparts; method 3, fitting to the current traces themselves from a range of protocols; and method 4, fitting to a single current trace from a short and rapidly fluctuating voltage-clamp protocol. We compare these methods using a set of experiments in which hERG1a current was measured in nine Chinese hamster ovary cells. In each cell, the same sequence of fitting protocols was applied, as well as an independent validation protocol. We show that methods 3 and 4 provide the best predictions on the independent validation set and that short, rapidly fluctuating protocols like that used in method 4 can replace much longer conventional protocols without loss of predictive ability. Although data for method 2 are most readily available from the literature, we find it performs poorly compared to methods 3 and 4 both in accuracy of predictions and computational efficiency. Our results demonstrate how novel experimental and computational approaches can improve the quality of model predictions in safety-critical applications.

Citing Articles

Evaluating the predictive accuracy of ion-channel models using data from multiple experimental designs.

Shuttleworth J, Lei C, Windley M, Hill A, Preston S, Mirams G Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2025; 383(2292):20240211.

PMID: 40078148 PMC: 11904619. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2024.0211.


Parameter inference for stochastic reaction models of ion channel gating from whole-cell voltage-clamp data.

Del Core L, Mirams G Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2025; 383(2292):20240224.

PMID: 40078146 PMC: 11904632. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2024.0224.


Optimizing experimental designs for model selection of ion channel drug-binding mechanisms.

Patten-Elliott F, Lei C, Preston S, Wilkinson R, Mirams G Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2025; 383(2292):20240227.

PMID: 40078143 PMC: 11904620. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2024.0227.


Understanding the impact of numerical solvers on inference for differential equation models.

Creswell R, Shepherd K, Lambert B, Mirams G, Lei C, Tavener S J R Soc Interface. 2024; 21(212):20230369.

PMID: 38442857 PMC: 10914510. DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2023.0369.


Evaluating sequential and allosteric activation models in IKs channels with mutated voltage sensors.

Fedida D, Sastre D, Dou Y, Westhoff M, Eldstrom J J Gen Physiol. 2024; 156(3).

PMID: 38294435 PMC: 10829594. DOI: 10.1085/jgp.202313465.


References
1.
Vandenberg C, Bezanilla F . A sodium channel gating model based on single channel, macroscopic ionic, and gating currents in the squid giant axon. Biophys J. 1991; 60(6):1511-33. PMC: 1260209. DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3495(91)82186-5. View

2.
Hoefen R, Reumann M, Goldenberg I, Moss A, O-Uchi J, Gu Y . In silico cardiac risk assessment in patients with long QT syndrome: type 1: clinical predictability of cardiac models. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60(21):2182-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.07.053. View

3.
Courtemanche M, Ramirez R, Nattel S . Ionic mechanisms underlying human atrial action potential properties: insights from a mathematical model. Am J Physiol. 1998; 275(1):H301-21. DOI: 10.1152/ajpheart.1998.275.1.H301. View

4.
Wang S, Liu S, Morales M, Strauss H, Rasmusson R . A quantitative analysis of the activation and inactivation kinetics of HERG expressed in Xenopus oocytes. J Physiol. 1997; 502 ( Pt 1):45-60. PMC: 1159571. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.1997.045bl.x. View

5.
Aslanidi O, Boyett M, Dobrzynski H, Li J, Zhang H . Mechanisms of transition from normal to reentrant electrical activity in a model of rabbit atrial tissue: interaction of tissue heterogeneity and anisotropy. Biophys J. 2009; 96(3):798-817. PMC: 3325123. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2008.09.057. View