# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

June  2018, 15(3): 667-691. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2018030

## Feedback control of an HBV model based on ensemble kalman filter and differential evolution

 1 Department of Computational Science and Engineering, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea 2 Department of Mathematics, Inha University, 100 Inharo, Nam-gu, Incheon 22212, Republic of Korea 3 Department of Mathematics, and Department of Computational Science and Engineering, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea

* Corresponding author: Hee-Dae Kwon

Received  March 13, 2017 Revised  September 14, 2017 Published  December 2017

In this paper, we derive efficient drug treatment strategies for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection by formulating a feedback control problem. We introduce and analyze a dynamic mathematical model that describes the HBV infection during antiviral therapy. We determine the reproduction number and then conduct a qualitative analysis of the model using the number. A control problem is considered to minimize the viral load with consideration for the treatment costs. In order to reflect the status of patients at both the initial time and the follow-up visits, we consider the feedback control problem based on the ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) and differential evolution (DE). EnKF is employed to estimate full information of the state from incomplete observation data. We derive a piecewise constant drug schedule by applying DE algorithm. Numerical simulations are performed using various weights in the objective functional to suggest optimal treatment strategies in different situations.

Citation: Junyoung Jang, Kihoon Jang, Hee-Dae Kwon, Jeehyun Lee. Feedback control of an HBV model based on ensemble kalman filter and differential evolution. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2018, 15 (3) : 667-691. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2018030
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
The bifurcation diagram of the model system
Feedback control algorithm
Mutation step to create a mutant vector $v_i$
Crossover step to yield one of the vectors $v_i$, $u'_i$, $u''_i$ and $x_i$ as a new candidate
Feedback controls $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$ and the corresponding states $T, V, I, E$ with $w_2=10^{-5}$, $w_3=10^{-5}$.
Feedback controls $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$ and the corresponding states $T, V, I, E$ with $w_2=10^{-3}$, $w_3=10^{-3}$.
Feedback controls $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$ and the corresponding states $T, V, I, E$ with $w_2=10^{-1}$, $w_3=10^{-1}$.
Feedback controls $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$ and the corresponding states $T, V, I, E$ with $w_2=10^{-3}$, $w_3=10^{-2}$.
The difference between the total amount of $\mu_2$ and $\mu_1$ using same treatment efficacy ($\eta = \epsilon = 0.9$).
The difference between the total amount of $\mu_2$ and $\mu_1$ using various combinations of treatment efficacy assuming the total efficacy of 99%.
Piecewise constant controls with monthly, biweekly, and weekly measurement and piecewise continuous controls with monthly measurement using $w_2=10^{-5}$, $w_3=10^{-5}$.
Piecewise constant controls with monthly, biweekly, and weekly measurement and piecewise continuous controls with monthly measurement using $w_2=10^{-3}$, $w_3=10^{-3}$.
Piecewise constant controls with monthly, biweekly, and weekly measurement and piecewise continuous controls with monthly measurement using $w_2=10^{-1}$, $w_3=10^{-1}$.
Parameters used in the model (1). They are principally extracted from Kim et al. [13].
 Description value units $S$ production rate of target cells $5\times10^5$ $\frac{cells}{mL \cdot day}$ $d_T$ death rate of target cells 0.003 $\frac{1}{day}$ $\eta$ treatment efficacy of inhibiting de novo infection $\in [0, 1]$ $\cdot$ $b$ de novo infection rate of target cells $4\times10^{-10}$ $\frac{mL}{virions \cdot day}$ $f$ calibration coefficient of $\alpha$ for target cells 0.1 $\cdot$ $m$ mitotic production rate of infected cells 0.003 $\frac{1}{day}$ $d_I$ death rate of infected cells 0.043 $\frac{1}{day}$ $\alpha$ immune effector-induced clearance rate of infected cells $7\times10^{-4}$ $\frac{mL}{cells \cdot day}$ $\epsilon$ treatment efficacy of inhibiting viral production $\in [0, 1]$ $\cdot$ $p$ viral production rate by infected cells 6.24 $\frac{virions}{cells \cdot day}$ $c$ clearance rate of free virions 0.7 $\frac{1}{day}$ $S_E$ production rate of immune effectors 9.33 $\frac{cells}{mL \cdot day}$ $B_E$ maximum birth rate for immune effectors 0.5 $\frac{1}{day}$ $K_E$ Michaelis-Menten type coefficient for immune effectors $4.07\times10^5$ $\frac{cells}{mL}$ $D_E$ death rate of immune effectors 0.52 $\frac{1}{day}$
 Description value units $S$ production rate of target cells $5\times10^5$ $\frac{cells}{mL \cdot day}$ $d_T$ death rate of target cells 0.003 $\frac{1}{day}$ $\eta$ treatment efficacy of inhibiting de novo infection $\in [0, 1]$ $\cdot$ $b$ de novo infection rate of target cells $4\times10^{-10}$ $\frac{mL}{virions \cdot day}$ $f$ calibration coefficient of $\alpha$ for target cells 0.1 $\cdot$ $m$ mitotic production rate of infected cells 0.003 $\frac{1}{day}$ $d_I$ death rate of infected cells 0.043 $\frac{1}{day}$ $\alpha$ immune effector-induced clearance rate of infected cells $7\times10^{-4}$ $\frac{mL}{cells \cdot day}$ $\epsilon$ treatment efficacy of inhibiting viral production $\in [0, 1]$ $\cdot$ $p$ viral production rate by infected cells 6.24 $\frac{virions}{cells \cdot day}$ $c$ clearance rate of free virions 0.7 $\frac{1}{day}$ $S_E$ production rate of immune effectors 9.33 $\frac{cells}{mL \cdot day}$ $B_E$ maximum birth rate for immune effectors 0.5 $\frac{1}{day}$ $K_E$ Michaelis-Menten type coefficient for immune effectors $4.07\times10^5$ $\frac{cells}{mL}$ $D_E$ death rate of immune effectors 0.52 $\frac{1}{day}$
 [1] Yuan Tan, Qingyuan Cao, Lan Li, Tianshi Hu, Min Su. A chance-constrained stochastic model predictive control problem with disturbance feedback. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019099 [2] Lars Grüne, Marleen Stieler. Multiobjective model predictive control for stabilizing cost criteria. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (8) : 3905-3928. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2018336 [3] Rudy R. Negenborn, Peter-Jules van Overloop, Tamás Keviczky, Bart De Schutter. Distributed model predictive control of irrigation canals. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2009, 4 (2) : 359-380. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2009.4.359 [4] Torsten Trimborn, Lorenzo Pareschi, Martin Frank. Portfolio optimization and model predictive control: A kinetic approach. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (11) : 6209-6238. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019136 [5] Michael Basin, Mark A. Pinsky. Control of Kalman-like filters using impulse and continuous feedback design. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2002, 2 (2) : 169-184. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2002.2.169 [6] João M. Lemos, Fernando Machado, Nuno Nogueira, Luís Rato, Manuel Rijo. Adaptive and non-adaptive model predictive control of an irrigation channel. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2009, 4 (2) : 303-324. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2009.4.303 [7] Norbert Koksch, Stefan Siegmund. Feedback control via inertial manifolds for nonautonomous evolution equations. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2011, 10 (3) : 917-936. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2011.10.917 [8] Sanling Yuan, Yongli Song, Junhui Li. Oscillations in a plasmid turbidostat model with delayed feedback control. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2011, 15 (3) : 893-914. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2011.15.893 [9] Shu Zhang, Jian Xu. Time-varying delayed feedback control for an internet congestion control model. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2011, 16 (2) : 653-668. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2011.16.653 [10] Luís Tiago Paiva, Fernando A. C. C. Fontes. Sampled–data model predictive control: Adaptive time–mesh refinement algorithms and guarantees of stability. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (5) : 2335-2364. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019098 [11] Judy Day, Jonathan Rubin, Gilles Clermont. Using nonlinear model predictive control to find optimal therapeutic strategies to modulate inflammation. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2010, 7 (4) : 739-763. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2010.7.739 [12] Gregory Zitelli, Seddik M. Djouadi, Judy D. Day. Combining robust state estimation with nonlinear model predictive control to regulate the acute inflammatory response to pathogen. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2015, 12 (5) : 1127-1139. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.1127 [13] Elimhan N. Mahmudov. Optimal control of evolution differential inclusions with polynomial linear differential operators. Evolution Equations & Control Theory, 2019, 8 (3) : 603-619. doi: 10.3934/eect.2019028 [14] Zhenyu Lu, Junhao Hu, Xuerong Mao. Stabilisation by delay feedback control for highly nonlinear hybrid stochastic differential equations. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (8) : 4099-4116. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019052 [15] Alexander Bibov, Heikki Haario, Antti Solonen. Stabilized BFGS approximate Kalman filter. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2015, 9 (4) : 1003-1024. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2015.9.1003 [16] Russell Johnson, Carmen Núñez. The Kalman-Bucy filter revisited. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2014, 34 (10) : 4139-4153. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2014.34.4139 [17] Sebastian Reich, Seoleun Shin. On the consistency of ensemble transform filter formulations. Journal of Computational Dynamics, 2014, 1 (1) : 177-189. doi: 10.3934/jcd.2014.1.177 [18] Mojtaba F. Fathi, Ahmadreza Baghaie, Ali Bakhshinejad, Raphael H. Sacho, Roshan M. D'Souza. Time-resolved denoising using model order reduction, dynamic mode decomposition, and kalman filter and smoother. Journal of Computational Dynamics, 2020, 7 (2) : 469-487. doi: 10.3934/jcd.2020019 [19] Guirong Jiang, Qishao Lu. The dynamics of a Prey-Predator model with impulsive state feedback control. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2006, 6 (6) : 1301-1320. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2006.6.1301 [20] Haiying Jing, Zhaoyu Yang. The impact of state feedback control on a predator-prey model with functional response. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2004, 4 (3) : 607-614. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2004.4.607

2018 Impact Factor: 1.313