Skip to main content
Log in

A theoretical explanation of “Concomitant resistance”

  • Published:
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Concomitant resistance is a tumor growth dynamic which results when the growth of a second tumor implant is inhibited by the presence of the first. Recently, we modeled tumor growth in the presence of a regenerating liver after partial hepatectomy (Michelson and Leith,Bull. Math. Biol. 57, 345–366, 1995), with an interlocking pair of growth control triads to account for the accelerated growth observed in both tissues. We also modeled tumor dormancy and recurrence as a dynamic equilibrium achieved between proliferating and quiescent subpopulations. In this paper those studies are extended to initially model the concomitant resistance case.

Two interlocking model systems are proposed. In one an interactive competition between the tumor implants is described, while in the other purely proportional growth inhibition is described. The equilibria and dynamics of each system when the coefficients are held constant are presented for three subcases of model parameters.

We show that the dynamic called concomitant resistance can be real or apparent, and that if the model coefficients are held constant, the only way to truly achieve concomitant resistance is by forcing one of the tumors into total quiescence. If this is the true state of the inhibited implant, then a non-constant recruitment signal is required to insure regrowth when the inhibitor mass is excised. We compare these theoretical results to a potential explanation of the phenomenon provided by Prehn (Cancer Res. 53, 3266–3269, 1993).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asaga, T., K. Suzuki, M. Umeda, Y. Sugimasa, S. Takemiya and T. Okamoto. 1991. The enhancement of tumor growth after partial hepatectomy and the effect of sera obtained from hepatectomized rats on tumor cell growth.Japanese J. Surg. 21, 669–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich, P. 1906. Experimentelle Coarcinomatuien an Mausen.Arb. Koniglichen Inst. Exp. Ther. Frankfurt,1, 65–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B. and E. R. Fisher. 1959. Experimental studies of factors influencing hepatic metastases II. Effect of partial hepatectomy.Cancer 12, 929–932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorelik, E. 1983. Concomitant tumor immunity and resistance to a second tumor challenge.Adv. Cancer Res. 39, 71–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gyllenberg, M. and G. F. Webb. 1990. A nonlinear structured population model of tumor growth with quiescence.J. Math. Biol. 28, 671–694.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Leith, J. T., G. Padfield and S. Michelson. 1992. Effects of partial hepatectomy on the growth characteristics and hypoxic fractions of xenografted DLD-2 human colon cancers.Rad. Res. 132, 263–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelson, S. and J. T. Leith. 1991. Autocrine and paracrine growth factors in tumor growth.Bull. Math. Biol. 53, 539–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelson, S. and J. T. Leith. 1992a. The autocrine-paracrine-endocrine triad of tumor growth control.Proceedings of Third International Conference on Communications and Control, Victoria, B.C., 16–18 October 1991, Vol. 2, pp. 481–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelson, S. and J. T. Leith. 1992b. Growth factors and growth control of heterogeneous cell populations.Bull. Math. Biol. 55, 993–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michelson, S. and J. T. Leith. 1994. Dormancy, regression, and recurrence: towards a unifying theory of tumorgrowth control.J. Theor. Biol. 169, 327–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michelson, S. and J. T. Leith. 1995. Interlocking triads of growth control in tumors.Bull. Math. Biol. 57, 345–366.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Namieno, T., N. Takeichi, Y. Hata, J. Uchinao and H. Kobayashi. 1991. Kinetic changes of liver regeneration and hepatocellular carcinoma cells after partial hepatectomy in rats.Gastroenterologia Japonica 26, 29–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paschkis, K. E., A. Cantarow, J. Stasney and J. H. Hobbs. 1955. Tumor growth in partially hepatectomized rats.Cancer Res. 15, 579–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prehn, R. T. 1991. The inhibition of tumor growth by tumor mass.Cancer Res. 51, 2–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prehn, R. T. 1993. Two competing influences that may explain concomitant tumor resistance.Cancer Res. 53, 3266–3269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, A. B., M. A. Anzano, L. M. Wakefield, N. S. Roche, D. F. Stern and M. B. Sporn. 1985. Type beta transforming growth factor: a bifunctional regulator of cellular growth.PNAS 82, 119–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggerio, R. A., O. D. Buatuoabad, R. D. Bonfil, R. P. Meiss and C. D. Pasqualini, 1985. “Concomitant immunity” in murine tumors of non-detectable immunogenicity.Br. J. Cancer 51, 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sordelli, D. O., P. A. Fontan, R. P. Meiss, R. A. Ruggerio and O. D. Buatuoabad. 1989. Anti-inflammation induced by counter irritation or by treatment with non-steroidal agents inhibits the growth of a tumor of non-detected immunogenicity.Br. J. Cancer 60, 734–738.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, G. F. 1992. A nonlinear cell population model of periodic chemotherapy treatment.WSSIAA 1, 569–583.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Michelson, S., Leith, J.T. A theoretical explanation of “Concomitant resistance”. Bltn Mathcal Biology 57, 733–747 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461849

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461849

Keywords

Navigation