Advertisement

Optimizing Chemotherapeutic Anti-cancer Treatment and the Tumor Microenvironment: An Analysis of Mathematical Models

  • Urszula LedzewiczEmail author
  • Heinz Schaettler
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 936)

Abstract

We review results about the structure of administration of chemotherapeutic anti-cancer treatment that we have obtained from an analysis of minimally parameterized mathematical models using methods of optimal control. This is a branch of continuous-time optimization that studies the minimization of a performance criterion imposed on an underlying dynamical system subject to constraints. The scheduling of anti-cancer treatments has all the features of such a problem: treatments are administered in time and the interactions of the drugs with the tumor and its microenvironment determine the efficacy of therapy. At the same time, constraints on the toxicity of the treatments need to be taken into account. The models we consider are low-dimensional and do not include more refined details, but they capture the essence of the underlying biology and our results give robust and rather conclusive qualitative information about the administration of optimal treatment protocols that strongly correlate with approaches taken in medical practice. We describe the changes that arise in optimal administration schedules as the mathematical models are increasingly refined to progress from models that only consider the cancerous cells to models that include the major components of the tumor microenvironment, namely the tumor vasculature and tumor-immune system interactions.

Keywords

Mathematical modeling Optimal control Optimization of cancer treatments Tumor microenvironment Anti-angiogenic therapy Tumor immune system interactions Metronomic chemotherapy 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under collaborative research Grants Nos. DMS 1311729/1311733. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

References

  1. 1.
    André N, Padovani L, Pasquier E (2011) Metronomic scheduling of anticancer treatment: the next generation of multitarget therapy? Future Oncol 7(3):385–394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benzekry S, Hahnfeldt P (2013) Maximum tolerated dose versus metronomic scheduling in the treatment of metastatic cancers. J Theor Biol 335:233–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Billy F, Clairambault J, Fercoq O (2012) Optimisation of cancer drug treatments using cell population dynamics. In: Ledzewicz U, Schättler H, Friedman A, Kashdan E (eds) Mathematical methods and models in biomedicine. Springer, New York, pp 265–309Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Friedman A (2012) Cancer as multifaceted disease. Math Model Nat Phenom 7:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Friedman A, Kim Y (2011) Tumor cell proliferation and migration under the influence of their microenvironment. Math Biosci Engr – MBE 8(2):371–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gatenby RA (2009) A change of strategy in the war on cancer. Nature 459:508–509. doi: 10.1038/459508a CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gatenby RA, Silva AS, Gillies RJ, Frieden BR (2009) Adaptive therapy. Cancer Res 69:4894–4903CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goldie JH, Coldman A (1998) Drug resistance in cancer. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hahnfeldt P, Panigrahy D, Folkman J, Hlatky L (1999) Tumor development under angiogenic signaling: a dynamical theory of tumor growth, treatment response, and postvascular dormancy. Cancer Res 59:4770–4775PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hanahan D, Bergers G, Bergsland E (2000) Less is more, regularly: metronomic dosing of cytotoxic drugs can target tumor angiogenesis in mice. J Clin Invest 105(8):145–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hao YB, Yi SY, Ruan J, Zhao L, Nan KJ (2014) New insights into metronomic chemotherapy- induced immunoregulation. Cancer Lett 354(2):220–226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jain RK (2001) Normalizing tumor vasculature with anti-angiogenic therapy: a new paradigm for combination therapy. Nat Med 7:987–989CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jain RK, Munn LL (2007) Vascular normalization as a rationale for combining chemotherapy with antiangiogenic agents. Princ Pract Oncol 21:1–7Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kamen B, Rubin E, Aisner J, Glatstein E (2000) High-time chemotherapy or high time for low dose? J Clin Oncol 18:2935–2937PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kerbel RS (1997) A cancer therapy resistant to resistance. Nature 390:335–336CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kerbel RS (2000) Tumor angiogenesis: past, present and near future. Carcinogensis 21:505–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klement G, Baruchel S, Rak J, Man S, Clark K, Hicklin DJ, Bohlen P, Kerbel RS (2000) Continuous low-dose therapy with vinblastine and VEGF receptor-2 antibody induces sustained tumor regression without overt toxicity. J Clin Invest 105(8):R15–R24CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kuznetsov VA, Makalkin IA, Taylor MA, Perelson AS (1994) Nonlinear dynamics of immunogenic tumors: parameter estimation and global bifurcation analysis. Bull Math Biol 56:295–321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ledzewicz U, Amini B, Schättler H (2015) Dynamics and control of a mathematical model for metronomic chemotherapy. Math Biosci, MBE 12(6):1257–1275. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.1257 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ledzewicz U, Bratton K, Schättler H (2014) A 3-compartment model for chemotherapy of heterogeneous tumor populations. Acta Appl Math 135(1):191–207. doi: 10.1007/s10440-014-9952-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ledzewicz U, FarajiMosalman MS, Schättler H (2013) Optimal controls for a mathematical model of tumor-immune interactions under targeted chemotherapy with immune boost. Discr Cont Dyn Syst Ser B 18:1031–1051. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2013.18.1031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ledzewicz U, Naghnaeian M, Schättler H (2012) Optimal response to chemotherapy for a mathematical model of tumor-immune dynamics. J Math Biol 64:557–577. doi: 10.1007/s00285-011-0424-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ledzewicz U, Schättler H (2002) Optimal bang-bang controls for a 2-compartment model in cancer chemotherapy. J Optim Theory Appl – JOTA 114:609–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ledzewicz U, Schättler H (2005) The influence of PK/PD on the structure of optimal control in cancer chemotherapy models. Math Biosci Eng (MBE) 2(3):561–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ledzewicz U, Schättler H (2007) Antiangiogenic therapy in cancer treatment as an optimal control problem. SIAM J Control Optim 46(3):1052–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ledzewicz U, Schättler H (2014) On optimal chemotherapy for heterogeneous tumors. J Biol Syst 22(2):1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ledzewicz U, Schättler H (2014) Tumor microenvironment and anticancer therapies: an optimal control approach. In: A d’Onofrio, A Gandolfi (eds) Mathematical Oncology, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ledzewicz U, Schättler H, Reisi Gahrooi M, Mahmoudian Dehkordi S (2013) On the MTD paradigm and optimal control for multi-drug cancer chemotherapy. Math Biosci Eng (MBE) 10(3):803–819. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2013.10.803 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lorz A, Lorenzi T, Hochberg ME, Clairambault J, Berthame B (2013) Population adaptive evolution, chemotherapeutic resistance and multiple anti-cancer therapies. ESAIM: Math Model Numer Anal 47:377–399. doi: 10.1051/m2an/2012031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lorz A, Lorenzi T, Clairambault J, Escargueil A, Perthame B (2015) Effects of space structure and combination therapies on phenotypic heterogeneity and drug resistance in solid tumors. Bull Math Biol 77:1–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Moore H, Li NK (2004) A mathematical model for chronic myelogeneous leukemia (CML) and T cell interaction. J Theor Biol 227:513–523CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nanda S, Moore H, Lenhart S (2007) Optimal control of treatment in a mathematical model of chronic myelogenous leukemia. Math Biosci 210:143–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Norton L, Simon R (1986) The Norton-Simon hypothesis revisited. Cancer Treat Rep 70:41–61Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    d‘Onofrio A, Ledzewicz U, Maurer H, Schättler H (2009) On optimal delivery of combination therapy for tumors. Math Biosci 222:13–26. doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2009.08.004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pasquier E, Kavallaris M, André N (2010) Metronomic chemotherapy: new rationale for new directions. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7:455–465CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pasquier E, Ledzewicz U (2013) Perspective on “more is not necessarily better”: metronomic chemotherapy. Newsl Soc Math Biol 26(2):9–10Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pietras K, Hanahan D (2005) A multi-targeted, metronomic and maximum tolerated dose ‘chemo- switch’ regimen is antiangiogenic, producing objective responses and survival benefit in a mouse model of cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:939–952CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schättler H, Ledzewicz U (2012) Geometric optimal control. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schättler H, Ledzewicz U (2015) Optimal control for mathematical models of cancer therapies. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schättler H, Ledzewicz U, Amini B (2016) Dynamical properties of a minimally parameterized mathematical model for metronomic chemotherapy. J Math Biol 72:1255–1280. doi:10.1007s/00285-015-0907yGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Stepanova NV (1980) Course of the immune reaction during the development of a malignant tumour. Biophysics 24:917–923Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Swierniak A (1988) Optimal treatment protocols in leukemia – modelling the proliferation cycle, Proc. 12th IMACS World Congress, Paris, vol 4, pp 170–172Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Swierniak A (1995) Cell cycle as an object of control. J Biol Syst 3:41–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Swierniak A, Ledzewicz U, Schättler H (2003) Optimal control for a class of compartmental models in cancer chemotherapy. Int J Appl Math Comp Sci 13:357–368Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Weitman SD, Glatstein E, Kamen BA (1993) Back to the basics: the importance of ‘concentration x time’ in oncology. J Clin Oncol 11:820–821PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsSouthern Illinois University EdwardsvilleEdwardsvilleUSA
  2. 2.Institute of MathematicsLodz University of TechnologyLodzPoland
  3. 3.Department of Electrical and Systems EngineeringWashington UniversitySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations