Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32712711›Full record

ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2020

Metaheuristics and Pontryagin's minimum principle for optimal therapeutic protocols in cancer immunotherapy: a case study and methods comparison.

Sima Sarv Ahrabi, Alireza Momenzadeh

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sima Sarv AhrabiDepartment of Basic and Applied Sciences for Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Antonio Scarpa, 14, 00161, Rome, Italy. sima.sarvahrabi@sbai.uniroma1.it.ORCID 0000-0001-8379-8799
Alireza MomenzadehDepartment of Information Engineering, Electronics and Telecommunications, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana, 18, 00184, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5682-4186

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper, the performance appropriateness of population-based metaheuristics for immunotherapy protocols is investigated on a comparative basis while the goal is to stimulate the immune system to defend against cancer. For this purpose, genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization are employed and compared with modern method of Pontryagin's minimum principle (PMP). To this end, a well-known mathematical model of cell-based cancer immunotherapy is described and examined to formulate the optimal control problem in which the objective is the annihilation of tumour cells by using the minimum amount of cultured immune cells. In this regard, the main aims are: (i) to introduce a single-objective optimization problem and to design the considered metaheuristics in order to appropriately deal with it; (ii) to use the PMP in order to obtain the necessary conditions for optimality, i.e. the governing boundary value problem; (iii) to measure the results obtained by using the proposed metaheuristics against those results obtained by using an indirect approach called forward-backward sweep method; and finally (iv) to produce a set of optimal treatment strategies by formulating the problem in a bi-objective form and demonstrating its advantages over single-objective optimization problem. A set of obtained results conforms the performance capabilities of the considered metaheuristics.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyModels, BiologicalNeoplasmsHumansTumor Cells, CulturedCancer immunotherapyForward-backward sweep methodGenetic algorithmMetaheuristicsOptimal controlParticle swarm optimizationPontryagin’s minimum principle

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.