Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 21;16(12):e1008495. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008495

Table 1. Comparison of CICO and stepwise profile likelihood methods for the cancer taxol treatment model.

LikelihoodProfiler (CICO) Original Matlab (Stepwise PL)
Parameter Lower Endpoint Upper Endpoint LF Calls (Lower) LF Calls (Upper) Time (sec) Lower Endpoint Upper Endpoint LF Calls (Lower) LF Calls (Upper) Time (sec)
a0 6.76 17.3 285 601 2.79 (7.9, 8.32)* (17.05, 17.46)* 285 1715 97.74
ka 4.99 10.73 522 349 3.26 (4.86, 5.26)* (10.52, 10.93)* 682 670 75.16
r0 NI 0.4 49 796 2.85 NI (0.36, 0.37)* 1510 7475 531.96
d0 0.19 NI 601 170 2.81 (0.13, 0.2)* NI 1605 >20000 >1000
kd 50.51 NI 796 223 3.74 (47.65, 53.61)* NI 930 12260 722.52

CI endpoints estimated with CICO and CIs’ estimates obtained in the original Matlab stepwise optimization-based implementation. The CI endpoints for original Matlab implementation are given as intervals

(*) because stepwise PL approach doesn’t estimate endpoints with any preset tolerance but marks two points before and after parameter’s profile intersects the threshold. NI stands for non-identifiable parameter. Elapsed time is measured by @time in Julia and tic toc in Matlab. Computations were performed on a standard desktop computer (2.30 GHz Intel Core i3 with 8 GB RAM).