Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37901317›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023

Mathematical modeling of radiotherapy: impact of model selection on estimating minimum radiation dose for tumor control.

Achyudhan R Kutuva, Jimmy J Caudell, Kosj Yamoah, Heiko Enderling, Mohammad U Zahid

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Identifiability and model selection frameworks for models of high-grade glioma response to chemoradiation.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Achyudhan R KutuvaDepartment of Integrated Mathematical Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL, United States.
Jimmy J CaudellDepartment of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL, United States.
Kosj YamoahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL, United States.
Heiko EnderlingDepartment of Integrated Mathematical Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL, United States.
Mohammad U ZahidDepartment of Integrated Mathematical Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL, United States.
Moffitt Cancer Center · US

Funding

Predict radiation-induced shifts in patient-specific tumor immune ecosystem composition to harness immunological consequences of radiotherapyU01CA244100 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI ENDERLING, HEIKO, PILON-THOMAS, SHARI · 2020 to 2025
$2.6M
Developing mathematical model driven optimized recurrent glioblastoma therapiesR21CA263911 · NCI · H. LEE MOFFITT CANCER CTR & RES INST · PI YU, HSIANG-HSUAN MICHAEL · 2021 to 2022
$420k
NCI NIH HHS R21 CA263911NCI NIH HHS U01 CA244100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Radiation therapy (RT) is one of the most common anticancer therapies. Yet, current radiation oncology practice does not adapt RT dose for individual patients, despite wide interpatient variability in radiosensitivity and accompanying treatment response. We have previously shown that mechanistic mathematical modeling of tumor volume dynamics can simulate volumetric response to RT for individual patients and estimation personalized RT dose for optimal tumor volume reduction. However, understanding the implications of the choice of the underlying RT response model is critical when calculating personalized RT dose. Methods: In this study, we evaluate the mathematical implications and biological effects of 2 models of RT response on dose personalization: (1) cytotoxicity to cancer cells that lead to direct tumor volume reduction (DVR) and (2) radiation responses to the tumor microenvironment that lead to tumor carrying capacity reduction (CCR) and subsequent tumor shrinkage. Tumor growth was simulated as logistic growth with pre-treatment dynamics being described in the proliferation saturation index (PSI). The effect of RT was simulated according to each respective model for a standard schedule of fractionated RT with 2 Gy weekday fractions. Parameter sweeps were evaluated for the intrinsic tumor growth rate and the radiosensitivity parameter for both models to observe the qualitative impact of each model parameter. We then calculated the minimum RT dose required for locoregional tumor control (LRC) across all combinations of the full range of radiosensitvity and proliferation saturation values. Results: Both models estimate that patients with higher radiosensitivity will require a lower RT dose to achieve LRC. However, the two models make opposite estimates on the impact of PSI on the minimum RT dose for LRC: the DVR model estimates that tumors with higher PSI values will require a higher RT dose to achieve LRC, while the CCR model estimates that higher PSI values will require a lower RT dose to achieve LRC. Discussion: Ultimately, these results show the importance of understanding which model best describes tumor growth and treatment response in a particular setting, before using any such model to make estimates for personalized treatment recommendations.

Indexed as

mathematical modelingmodel comparisononcologypersonalized oncologyradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID37901317
PMCPMC10600389
OpenAlexW4387459780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.