Back

Conditional success of adaptive therapy: the role of treatment-pausing thresholds revealed by mathematical modeling

Sun, L.; Zhang, H.; Kang, K.; Wang, X.; Zhang, L.; Cai, Y.; Zhuge, C.; Zhang, L.

2025-02-17 systems biology
10.1101/2025.02.13.638061 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Adaptive therapy improves cancer treatment by controlling the competition between sensitive and resistant cells through treatment holidays. This study highlights the critical role of treatmentholiday thresholds in adaptive therapy for tumors composed of drug-sensitive and resistant cells. Using a Lotka-Volterra model, adaptive therapy outcomes are compared with maximum tolerated dose therapy and intermittent therapy outcomes, showing that adaptive therapy success depends critically on the threshold for pausing and resuming treatment and on competitive interactions between cell populations. Three comparison scenarios between adaptive therapy and other therapies emerge: uniform-decline where adaptive therapy underperforms regardless of threshold, conditional-improve where efficacy requires threshold optimization, and uniform-improve where adaptive therapy consistently outperforms alternatives. Tumor composition including initial burden and resistant cell proportion influences outcomes. Threshold adjustments enable adaptive therapy to suppress resistant subclones while preserving sensitive cells, extending progression-free survival. Crucially, this work establishes an optimal control problem for time-to-progression and mathematically proves that under biological constraints like neutral competition or low initial burden, the theoretically optimal strategy is unrealizable as it requires infinitely many treatment holidays, rendering it clinically impractical. These findings emphasize personalized treatment strategies for enhancing long-term therapeutic outcomes. Mathematics Subject Classification92C50,92C42.

Published in Mathematical Modelling of Natural Phenomena · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.