ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Gaming the cancer-immunity cycle by synchronizing the dose schedules.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time matters: circadian genetics and the molecular logic of human health and disease.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- Plying potency assays for immunotherapy of solid tumors.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Analysing the Structural Identifiability and Observability of Mechanistic Models of Tumour Growth.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We introduce a mathematical model of the cancer-immunity cycle and use it to test several hypotheses regarding the combination, timing, and optimization associated with chemotherapy and immunotherapy dosing schedules in the context of competition and time-dependent selection pressure. A key idea is the value of synchronizing the dosing schedules with the fundamental period of the cancer-immunity cycle. The competitors in the population dynamics evolutionary game are the cancer cells, healthy (normal) cells, and T cells, which conceptually form a nontransitive rock-paper-scissor chain. The chemotherapy and immunotherapy dosing schedules each act as control functions whose timing and magnitudes we synchronize with the fundamental period of the underlying nonlinear dynamical system. With the model, we show among other more detailed results, that chemotherapy and immunotherapy pulse-dosing schedules do not commute; the best duration of the chemotherapy is one-quarter of the cancer-immunity cycle, whereas for immunotherapy it is one-half cycle; immunotherapy dosing should precede chemotherapy dosing and last twice as long. A general conclusion is that optimized timing of the dosing schedules can make up for lower total dose, opening up new possibilities for designing less toxic and more efficacious dosing regimens with drugs currently in use. Obtaining and calibrating more accurate measurements of the cycle-period across patient populations would be an important step in making some of these ideas clinically actionable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.