IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,214,201
Granted Patent B2
US 12,214,201 · App. 16/966,390 · Granted Feb 4, 2025

Method for adaptive control of a medical device using Bayesian optimization

Inventors: Logan Grado (Minneapolis, MN); Theoden Netoff (Minneapolis, MN); Andy Lamperski (Minneapolis, MN); Bryan Moore (Minneapolis, MN)
Assignee: REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
A61N1/36139A61N1/36132A61N1/36557A61N1/36585
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,214,201
App. No.
16/966,390
Granted
Feb 4, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems and methods for adaptively controlling an electrical stimulation device, such as a closed-loop stimulation device, based in part on a Bayesian optimization of the operational parameters of the device are described. An adaptive dual control of the stimulation device can be provided. In a first control loop parameters are extracted from signals recorded from the subject by the stimulation device, and in a second control loop a Bayesian optimization is implemented with a hardware processor and memory to compute updated operational parameters for the stimulation device. As noted, the stimulation device is an electrical stimulation device, and may be a closed-loop stimulation device. Such devices can be used for deep brain stimulation (“DBS”), cardiac resynchronization therapy (“CRT”), and other electrophysiological stimulation applications.

Claims (32)

1. An adaptive controller for controlling a controllable medical device, comprising:

an input that receives feedback data representative of a treatment response or effect in a subject;

a processor in communication with the input and programmed to:

receive the feedback data from the input and generate a posterior distribution therefrom;

estimate an acquisition function from the posterior distribution; and

generate updated control parameter settings based on the acquisition function;

a memory in communication with the input and the processor, wherein the memory stores instructions for generating updated control parameter settings, the feedback data received from the input, and the updated control parameter settings generated by the processor;

an output that communicates the updated control parameter settings to a controllable medical device comprising an electrical stimulation device having a pulse generator and at least one electrode in communication with the pulse generator;

wherein the processor is programmed to generate a response surface based on the feedback data using a probit function;

wherein the feedback data comprise user preferences between two different control parameter settings;

wherein the posterior distribution is generated using the response surface generated based on the feedback data using the probit function; and

wherein the processor receives control signals generated based on the updated control parameters settings and sends the controls signals to the pulse generator of the controllable medical device by the output; and

wherein the pulse generator of the controllable medical device receives the control signals from the output and in response thereto generates electrical signals and sends the electrical signals to the at least one electrode of the controllable medical device to generate an electrical stimulation based on the updated control parameter settings.

2. The adaptive controller as recited in claim 1 , wherein the feedback data received from the input further comprise behavior metrics, and wherein the processor is programmed to also generate the response surface based on the behavior metrics.

3. The adaptive controller as recited in claim 1 , wherein the feedback data received from the input further comprise at least one of physiological data or behavioral metrics.

4. The adaptive controller as recited in claim 3 , wherein the physiological data comprises at least one of neural signals, cardiac signals, or chemical signals.

5. The adaptive controller as recited in claim 4 , wherein the physiological data comprises chemical signals including at least one of insulin levels or glucose levels.

6. The adaptive controller as recited in claim 1 , wherein the user preferences comprise user preference responses to a questionnaire.

7. The adaptive controller as recited in claim 1 , wherein the electrical stimulation device comprises at least one of a peripheral nerve stimulator, a central nervous system stimulator, a cardiac pacemaker, or a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device.

8. A system, comprising:

a controllable medical device comprising an electrical stimulation device having a pulse generator and at least one electrode in communication with the pulse generator and in contact with a subject to deliver electrical stimulation according to control parameter settings to the subject patient; and

a controller, the controller comprising:

(i) an input that receives feedback data representative of a treatment response or effect in the subject patient of delivered electrical stimulation, wherein the feedback data comprises user preference relative to electrical stimulation delivered according to a first control parameter setting and different electrical stimulation delivered according to a second control parameter setting;

(ii) a processor in communication with the input and programmed to:

(A) receive the feedback data from the input;

(B) generate a response surface based on the feedback data using a probit function;

(C) generate a posterior distribution from the response surface;

(D) estimate an acquisition function from the posterior distribution; and

(E) generate updated control parameter settings based on the acquisition function;

(iii) a memory in communication with the input and the processor, wherein the memory stores instructions for receiving the feedback, generating the response surface, generating the posterior distribution, estimating the acquisition function, generating updated control parameter settings and storing control parameter settings and updated control parameter settings;

(iv) an output that communicates the updated control parameter settings to the controllable medical device;

wherein the controllable medical device receives the updated control parameters settings, and the pulse generator delivers electrical stimulation to the subject patient according to the updated control parameter settings.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Feb 1, 2021
From: GRADO, LOGAN; NETOFF, THEODEN; LAMPERSKI, ANDY; MOORE, BRYAN
To: REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Reel/Frame 055092/0234 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 62625134 · Feb 1, 2018
Related Publication 20200391037A1 · Dec 17, 2020
References Cited (47)
US 6345128B1 · Stokes · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 7324851B1 · DiLorenzo · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 9084066B2 · De Vries · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9992586B2 · Nielsen · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20100008526A1 · De Vries · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110178789A1 · Miranda · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20140081350A1 · Zhu · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150190100A1 · Fox · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150320588A1 · Connor · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20170257713A1 · Westermann · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180365194A1 · Grado · 2018 [cited by applicant]
AU 2019200482A1 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
WO 2014149536A2 · 2014 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2016134212A1 · 2016 [cited by examiner]
WO 2016205231A1 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
Azodi-Avval R, et al. Phase-dependent modulation as a novel approach for therapeutic brain stimulation. Frontiers In Computational Neuroscience. Feb. 9, 2015:1-7. [cited by applicant]
Brochu E, et al. A Tutorial on Bayesian Optimization of Expensive Cost Functions, with Application to Active User Modeling and Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning. arXiv. 2010. [cited by applicant]
Cagnan H, et al. Stimulating at the right time: phase-specific deep brain stimulation. Brain. 2016; p. 1-14. [cited by applicant]
Connolly AT, et al. Modulations in Oscillatory Frequency and Coupling in Globus Pallidus with Increasing Parkinsonian Severity. Journal of Neuroscience. 2015; 35(15):6231-6240. [cited by applicant]
Contarino MF, et al. Directional steering: A novel approach to deep brain stimulation. Neurology. 2014; 83(13):1163-1169. [cited by applicant]
Courtemanche R, et al. Synchronous, focally modulated beta-band oscillations characterize local field potential activity in the striatum of awake behaving monkeys. The Journal of neuroscience: the official journal of th… [cited by applicant]
De Hemptinne C, et al. Exaggerated phase-amplitude coupling in the primary motor cortex in Parkinson disease. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2013; 110(12):4780-5. [cited by applicant]
Grado LL, et al. (Dec. 2018) Bayesian adaptive dual control of deep brain stimulation in a computational model of Parkinson's disease. PLoS Comput Biol 14(12):e1006606. [cited by applicant]
Grado LL, et al. The Sliding Windowed Infinite Fourier Transform. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine. 2017; 34(5):183-188. [cited by applicant]
Holt AB, et al. Phasic Burst Stimulation: A Closed-Loop Approach to Tuning Deep Brain Stimulation Parameters for Parkinson's Disease. PLoS Computational Biology. 2016; 12(7):1-14. [cited by applicant]
International Searching Authority. International Search Report and Written Opinion for application PCT/US2019/016380. Mailed on Apr. 30, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Jackson JC, et al. Computationally efficient, configurable, causal, real-time phase detection applied to local field potential oscillations. In: IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering; 2015. p. 942-947. [cited by applicant]
Jensen, B. S., et al. “Efficient preference learning with pairwise continuous observations and Gaussian processes.” 2011 IEEE International Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing. IEEE, 2011. [cited by applicant]
Jensen, B. S., et al. “Pairwise Judgements and Absolute Ratings with Gaussian Process Priors.” (2014). Technical University of Denmark. [cited by applicant]
Little S, et al. Adaptive deep brain stimulation in advanced Parkinson disease. Annals of Neurology. 2013; p. 449-457. [cited by applicant]
Little S, et al. Bilateral adaptive deep brain stimulation is effective in Parkinson's disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 2015; p. 717-721. [cited by applicant]
Locatelli M. Bayesian algorithms for one-dimensional global optimization. J Global Optim. 1997; 10 (1):57-76. [cited by applicant]
Martinez-Cantin R, et al. A Bayesian exploration-exploitation approach for optimal online sensing and planning with a visually guided mobile robot. Autonomous Robots. 2009; 27(2):93-103. [cited by applicant]
Mockus J, et al. The application of Bayesian methods for seeking the extremum. Towards Global Optimisation. 1978; 2:117-129. [cited by applicant]
Mockus J. Application of Bayesian approach to numerical methods of global and stochastic optimization. Journal of Global Optimization. 1994; 4(4):347-365. [cited by applicant]
Nelder JA, et al. A simplex method for function minimization. The Computer Journal. 1965; 7 (4):308-313. [cited by applicant]
Nielsen, JBB, et al. “Efficient individualization of hearing aid processed sound.” 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing. IEEE, 2013. [cited by applicant]
Nielsen, JBB, et al. “Perception-based personalization of hearing aids using Gaussian processes and active learning.” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 23.1 (2014): 162-173. [cited by applicant]
Ryapolova-Webb E, et al. Chronic cortical and electromyographic recordings from a fully implantable device: preclinical experience in a nonhuman primate. Journal of neural engineering. 2014; 11(1):016009. [cited by applicant]
Santaniello S, et al. Closed-loop control of deep brain stimulation: a simulation study. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2011; 19(1):15-24. [cited by applicant]
Smeal RM, et al. Phase-response curves and synchronized neural networks. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2010; 365(1551):2407-2422. [cited by applicant]
Snoek J, et al. Scalable Bayesian Optimization Using Deep Neural Networks. arXiv. 2015. [cited by applicant]
Springenberg JT, et al. Bayesian Optimization with Robust Bayesian Neural Networks. Nips. 2016; p. 4134-4142. [cited by applicant]
Srinivas N, et al. Gaussian Process Optimization in the Bandit Setting: No Regret and Experimental Design. arXiv. 2009. [cited by applicant]
Streltsov S, et al. A Non-myopic Utility Function for Statistical Global Optimization Algorithms. Journal of Global Optimization. 1999; 14(3):283-298. [cited by applicant]
Volkmann J, et al. Introduction to the programming of deep brain stimulators. Movement disorders: official journal of the Movement Disorder Society. 2002; 17 Suppl 3:S181-7. [cited by applicant]
European Patent Office. Extended European Search Report for application 19747327.5. Mailed on Oct. 7, 2021. 9 pages. [cited by applicant]