Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jun 10;10(6):e0129433.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129433. eCollection 2015.

Predictive Modeling of Drug Response in Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Affiliations

Predictive Modeling of Drug Response in Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Hermann B Frieboes et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

We combine mathematical modeling with experiments in living mice to quantify the relative roles of intrinsic cellular vs. tissue-scale physiological contributors to chemotherapy drug resistance, which are difficult to understand solely through experimentation. Experiments in cell culture and in mice with drug-sensitive (Eµ-myc/Arf-/-) and drug-resistant (Eµ-myc/p53-/-) lymphoma cell lines were conducted to calibrate and validate a mechanistic mathematical model. Inputs to inform the model include tumor drug transport characteristics, such as blood volume fraction, average geometric mean blood vessel radius, drug diffusion penetration distance, and drug response in cell culture. Model results show that the drug response in mice, represented by the fraction of dead tumor volume, can be reliably predicted from these inputs. Hence, a proof-of-principle for predictive quantification of lymphoma drug therapy was established based on both cellular and tissue-scale physiological contributions. We further demonstrate that, if the in vitro cytotoxic response of a specific cancer cell line under chemotherapy is known, the model is then able to predict the treatment efficacy in vivo. Lastly, tissue blood volume fraction was determined to be the most sensitive model parameter and a primary contributor to drug resistance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Strategy for model calibration and validation.
Values for mathematical model input parameters are initially calibrated from experimental data obtained from untreated subjects and cell culture, yielding blood volume fraction, diffusion penetration distance, radius of blood sources, and fraction of cells killed in culture. Based on these parameter values, the model then calculates the fraction of tumor volume that would be killed in vivo, which can be compared to experimental data obtained from treated subjects.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Drug response experiments in vitro.
(Left) Measurement of in vitro cell kill in cell culture for Eμ-myc/Arf-/- and Eμ-myc/p53-/- cells after 48 hours at 50 nM Dox concentration (N.S.: not statistically significant). (Right) Results from a flow cytometry study were used to measure apoptotic cells. Eμ-myc/p53-/- cells are displayed along the top row with Eμ-myc/Arf-/- cells along the bottom; controls (no drug) are in the left column, and drug-treated cells (Dox) are in the right column. For each block, lower left quadrant represents live (proliferating) cells; lower right quadrant shows apoptotic cells; upper right quadrant shows dead cells.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Necrotic cell fraction in murine lymphoma tumors after treatment with Dox.
Data are shown for tumor slices S1 through S5. Most of the necrosis is a result of the drug treatment since necrosis measured in untreated tumors was negligible (Table 2). Note that the drug-sensitive tumors shrank in size after treatment and thus had one less histological slice than the drug-resistant tumors (to account for this, two slices of the drug-resistant tumor are included in the central region S3, i.e., five total slices for Eμ-myc/Arf-/- and six for Eμ-myc/p53-/-). All error bars represent standard deviation from at least n = 3 measurements in each section. Asterisks show level of statistical significance determined by student’s t-test with α = 0.05 (asterisk, P < 0.05).
Fig 4
Fig 4. Whole-tumor measurement of lymphoma characteristics.
Measurements from the IHC data after treatment with Dox shows cell fractions for: (A) apoptosis, (B) endothelium, (C) hypoxia, (D) proliferation. Note that the drug-sensitive tumors shrank in size after treatment and thus had one less histological slice than the drug-resistant tumors in the middle Set (S3). Error bars represent standard deviation (n = 3 regions of interest per slice).
Fig 5
Fig 5. Mathematical model predicts lymphoma tumor death due to chemotherapy drug treatment.
Comparison of histopathology measurements with mathematical model predictions (Eq 2, solid lines) based on estimates of two parameters r b / L and fkillM. Data points for drug-resistant cells (blue) were scaled by 3.5 (see Fig 2A) to be comparable with data for drug-sensitive cells (green). Obtained R 2 = 0.86; estimated fkillM = 0.25, and r b / L = 0.068. Diffusion distance of drug from the vessels (40 ± 20 μm) was assumed in the best case not to exceed half that of O2. Each point represents measurements from one tumor Set; 5 data points for the drug-sensitive cell line (green) and 6 data points for the drug-resistant cell line (blue).
Fig 6
Fig 6. Sensitivity analysis results.
Plots of absolute values of sensitivity coefficients for the three parameters for (A) the drug-sensitive cell line, Eμ-myc/Arf-/- and (B) the drug-resistant cell line, Eμ-myc/p53-/-. The range of variation for each parameter is listed in S1 Table. S represents sensitivity coefficient.

References

    1. O'Connor OA, Horwitz S, Hamlin P, Portlock C, Moskowitz CH, Sarasohn D, et al. Phase II-I-II study of two different doses and schedules of pralatrexate, a high-affinity substrate for the reduced folate carrier, in patients with relapsed or refractory lymphoma reveals marked activity in T-cell malignancies. Journal of clinical oncology: official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2009;27(26):4357–64. Epub 2009/08/05. 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.8470 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. O'Connor OA, Pro B, Pinter-Brown L, Bartlett N, Popplewell L, Coiffier B, et al. Pralatrexate in patients with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma: results from the pivotal PROPEL study. Journal of clinical oncology: official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2011;29(9):1182–9. Epub 2011/01/20. 10.1200/JCO.2010.29.9024 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ogura M, Tsukasaki K, Nagai H, Uchida T, Oyama T, Suzuki T, et al. Phase I study of BCX1777 (forodesine) in patients with relapsed or refractory peripheral T/natural killer-cell malignancies. Cancer science. 2012;103(7):1290–5. Epub 2012/03/28. 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2012.02287.x . - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Paoluzzi L, Kitagawa Y, Kalac M, Zain J, O'Connor OA. New drugs for the treatment of lymphoma. Hematology/oncology clinics of North America. 2008;22(5):1007–35, x. Epub 2008/10/29. 10.1016/j.hoc.2008.07.006 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Toner LE, Vrhovac R, Smith EA, Gardner J, Heaney M, Gonen M, et al. The schedule-dependent effects of the novel antifolate pralatrexate and gemcitabine are superior to methotrexate and cytarabine in models of human non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Clinical cancer research: an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. 2006;12(3 Pt 1):924–32. Epub 2006/02/10. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0331 . - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources