Dataset Information

Mathematical Models of Cancer: When to Predict Novel Therapies, and When Not to.

ABSTRACT: The number of publications on mathematical modeling of cancer is growing at an exponential rate, according to PubMed records, provided by the US National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. Seminal papers have initiated and promoted mathematical modeling of cancer and have helped define the field of mathematical oncology (Norton and Simon in J Natl Cancer Inst 58:1735-1741, 1977; Norton in Can Res 48:7067-7071, 1988; Hahnfeldt et al. in Can Res 59:4770-4775, 1999; Anderson et al. in Comput Math Methods Med 2:129-154, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1080/10273660008833042 ; Michor et al. in Nature 435:1267-1270, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03669 ; Anderson et al. in Cell 127:905-915, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.09.042 ; Benzekry et al. in PLoS Comput Biol 10:e1003800, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003800 ). Following the introduction of undergraduate and graduate programs in mathematical biology, we have begun to see curricula developing with specific and exclusive focus on mathematical oncology. In 2018, 218 articles on mathematical modeling of cancer were published in various journals, including not only traditional modeling journals like the Bulletin of Mathematical Biology and the Journal of Theoretical Biology, but also publications in renowned science, biology, and cancer journals with tremendous impact in the cancer field (Cell, Cancer Research, Clinical Cancer Research, Cancer Discovery, Scientific Reports, PNAS, PLoS Biology, Nature Communications, eLife, etc). This shows the breadth of cancer models that are being developed for multiple purposes. While some models are phenomenological in nature following a bottom-up approach, other models are more top-down data-driven. Here, we discuss the emerging trend in mathematical oncology publications to predict novel, optimal, sometimes even patient-specific treatments, and propose a convention when to use a model to predict novel treatments and, probably more importantly, when not to.

SUBMITTER: Brady R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6764933 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mathematical Models of Cancer: When to Predict Novel Therapies, and When Not to.

Brady Renee R Enderling Heiko H

Bulletin of mathematical biology 20190723 10

The number of publications on mathematical modeling of cancer is growing at an exponential rate, according to PubMed records, provided by the US National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. Seminal papers have initiated and promoted mathematical modeling of cancer and have helped define the field of mathematical oncology (Norton and Simon in J Natl Cancer Inst 58:1735-1741, 1977; Norton in Can Res 48:7067-7071, 1988; Hahnfeldt et al. in Can Res 59:4770-4775, 1999; Anderson ...[more]

PMID: 31338741

Similar Datasets

Project description:Upon infection of a new host, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) replicates in the mucosal tissues and is generally undetectable in circulation for 1-2 weeks post-infection. Several interventions against HIV including vaccines and antiretroviral prophylaxis target virus replication at this earliest stage of infection. Mathematical models have been used to understand how HIV spreads from mucosal tissues systemically and what impact vaccination and/or antiretroviral prophylaxis has on viral eradication. Because predictions of such models have been rarely compared to experimental data, it remains unclear which processes included in these models are critical for predicting early HIV dynamics. Here we modified the "standard" mathematical model of HIV infection to include two populations of infected cells: cells that are actively producing the virus and cells that are transitioning into virus production mode. We evaluated the effects of several poorly known parameters on infection outcomes in this model and compared model predictions to experimental data on infection of non-human primates with variable doses of simian immunodifficiency virus (SIV). First, we found that the mode of virus production by infected cells (budding vs. bursting) has a minimal impact on the early virus dynamics for a wide range of model parameters, as long as the parameters are constrained to provide the observed rate of SIV load increase in the blood of infected animals. Interestingly and in contrast with previous results, we found that the bursting mode of virus production generally results in a higher probability of viral extinction than the budding mode of virus production. Second, this mathematical model was not able to accurately describe the change in experimentally determined probability of host infection with increasing viral doses. Third and finally, the model was also unable to accurately explain the decline in the time to virus detection with increasing viral dose. These results suggest that, in order to appropriately model early HIV/SIV dynamics, additional factors must be considered in the model development. These may include variability in monkey susceptibility to infection, within-host competition between different viruses for target cells at the initial site of virus replication in the mucosa, innate immune response, and possibly the inclusion of several different tissue compartments. The sobering news is that while an increase in model complexity is needed to explain the available experimental data, testing and rejection of more complex models may require more quantitative data than is currently available.

Project description:BackgroundTherapeutic vaccination against disseminated prostate cancer (PCa) is partially effective in some PCa patients. We hypothesized that the efficacy of treatment will be enhanced by individualized vaccination regimens tailored by simple mathematical models.Methodology/principal findingsWe developed a general mathematical model encompassing the basic interactions of a vaccine, immune system and PCa cells, and validated it by the results of a clinical trial testing an allogeneic PCa whole-cell vaccine. For model validation in the absence of any other pertinent marker, we used the clinically measured changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels as a correlate of tumor burden. Up to 26 PSA levels measured per patient were divided into each patient's training set and his validation set. The training set, used for model personalization, contained the patient's initial sequence of PSA levels; the validation set contained his subsequent PSA data points. Personalized models were simulated to predict changes in tumor burden and PSA levels and predictions were compared to the validation set. The model accurately predicted PSA levels over the entire measured period in 12 of the 15 vaccination-responsive patients (the coefficient of determination between the predicted and observed PSA values was R(2)?=?0.972). The model could not account for the inconsistent changes in PSA levels in 3 of the 15 responsive patients at the end of treatment. Each validated personalized model was simulated under many hypothetical immunotherapy protocols to suggest alternative vaccination regimens. Personalized regimens predicted to enhance the effects of therapy differed among the patients.Conclusions/significanceUsing a few initial measurements, we constructed robust patient-specific models of PCa immunotherapy, which were retrospectively validated by clinical trial results. Our results emphasize the potential value and feasibility of individualized model-suggested immunotherapy protocols.

Dataset Information

Mathematical Models of Cancer: When to Predict Novel Therapies, and When Not to.

Publications

Mathematical Models of Cancer: When to Predict Novel Therapies, and When Not to.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets