| Literature DB >> 24564919 |
Fuhai Li, Hua Tan, Jaykrishna Singh, Jian Yang, Xiaofeng Xia, Jiguang Bao, Jinwen Ma, Ming Zhan, Stephen T C Wong.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent reports indicate that a subgroup of tumor cells named cancer stem cells (CSCs) or tumor initiating cells (TICs) are responsible for tumor initiation, growth and drug resistance. This subgroup of tumor cells has self-renewal capacity and could differentiate into heterogeneous tumor cell populations through asymmetric proliferation. The idea of CSC provides informative insights into tumor initiation, metastasis and treatment. However, the underlying mechanisms of CSCs regulating tumor behaviors are unclear due to the complex cancer system. To study the functions of CSCs in the complex tumor system, a few mathematical modeling studies have been proposed. Whereas, the effect of microenvironment (mE) factors, the behaviors of CSCs, progenitor tumor cells (PCs) and differentiated tumor cells (TCs), and the impact of CSC fraction and signaling heterogeneity, are not adequately explored yet.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24564919 PMCID: PMC3866259 DOI: 10.1186/1752-0509-7-S2-S12
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Syst Biol ISSN: 1752-0509
Figure 1The schematic of the 3D multiscale model and the implementation. The molecular scale describing the diffusion and reaction processes of mE factors with PDEs. The cellular level models the behaviours of cells with a 3D cellular automata. The tissue level visualizes the whole tumor morphology.
Figure 2The interactions between micro-environmental (mE) factors and tumor cells. The outer circle stands for mE factors being considered at the molecular level, the inner circle corresponds to the processes investigated at the cellular level. The interrelations are denoted by the solid arrows.
Figure 3The flowchart of control in the multiscale model of CSC-initiated tumor development. (A) Each cell evolves according to their life cycle under the conditions confined by the PDE system. Necrosis occurs when cell death is induced by hypoxia. (B) Hierarchical organization of different cell subtypes and their proliferative kinetics. Cancer stem cells (CSC) expand their own population by symmetric proliferation to two identical daughter cells still with CSC-like traits and expand the whole tumor through asymmetric differentiation to progenitor cells (PC) and terminally differentiated cells (TC) in this model. Similarly, PCs contribute to the constitution of the tumor in a similar way, but do not reversibly produce CSCs according to the hierarchical organization hypothesis. The TCs are assumed to either proliferate or be apoptotic at each time point without ability to divide into any other subtypes. The parameters above the arrows indicate the occurrence probability of the referred event at each time point.
Figure 4Simulation of tumor development under different CSC contents. (A) Time evolution of tumors initiated by pure CSCs and unsorted tumor cells. (B) The corresponding concentration profiles of micro-environmental (mE) factors.
Figure 5Quantitative comparison between tumor development initiated from pure CSCs and unsorted tumor cells. The proliferation potential, time needed to reach potential, average aggressive index, and average fitting error of tumors are compared between two kinds of tumors in five simulations.
Model parameters.
| Parameter Symbol | Parameter Annotation | Parameter Value | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diffusion rate of Nutrient | 1.0 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| Diffusion rate of TAF | 100 | Estimated | |
| Diffusion rate of MDE | 1.0 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| Uptake rate of Nutrient | [0.2, 0.5, 0.33, 0.67, 1, 1] | X. Zheng et al. (2005); Estimated | |
| Binding rate of nutrient | 2.5·e-3 | Estimated | |
| Nutrient transfer rate from neo-vasculature | 0.05 | X. Zheng et al. (2005); Estimated | |
| Nutrient transfer rate from existing vessel | 0.01 | Estimated | |
| TAF secretion rate by dying cells | 0.05 | Estimated | |
| TAF secretion rate by viable cells | 0.004 | Estimated | |
| TAF degradation rate | 0.01 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| TAF uptake rate by endothelial cells | 0.025 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| MDE secretion rate by viable cells | {50, 100, 150} | P. Macklin et al. (2009); Estimated | |
| MDE secretion rate by endothelial cells | 1.0 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| MDE degradation rate | 10 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| ECM secretion rate by viable cells | 0.1 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| ECM secretion rate by endothelial cells | 0.01 | Estimated | |
| ECM degradation rate | 0.01 | P. Macklin et al. (2009) | |
| Volume loss rate due to apoptosis | 0~0.00013 | Estimated | |
| Volume loss rate due to necrosis | 0.25 | X. Zheng et al. (2005) | |
| Nutrient dose for cell survival | {0.1, 0.17, 0.25} | X. Zheng et al. (2005); Estimated | |
| Maximum drug concentration for cell survival | {0.25, 0.27, 0.375} | Estimated | |
| [ | CSC proliferation probabilities | {0.6, 0.25, 0.1, 0.05} | Estimated |
| [ | PC proliferation probabilities | {0.25, 0.75} | Estimated |
| [ | TC proliferation probability | [1- | Estimated |
| Relative proliferation ages | [1, 0.4, 1, 0.2] | Estimated | |
| Maximum generations a cell can divide | [250, 50, 25] | Estimated | |
| Constant for cell size scaling | 10·e-5 | Estimated | |
NOTE:
P. Macklin et al. (2009): Macklin, P., et al., Multiscale modelling and nonlinear simulation of vascular tumour growth. J Math Biol, 2009. 58(4-5): p. 765-98.
X. Zheng et al. (2005): Zheng, X., S.M. Wise, and V. Cristini, Nonlinear simulation of tumor necrosis, neo-vascularization and tissue invasion via an adaptive finite-element/level-set method. Bull Math Biol, 2005. 67(2): p. 211-59.
Figure 6Sensitivity analysis (A) The sensitivity analysis of the continuous parameters. (B) The sensitivity analysis of the proliferation related parameters.
Figure 7Simulation of chemo-drug therapy response. (A) A 9-week treatment to a tumor initiated from pure CSCs. The tumor volume first reduces fast, then remains stable during drug treatment; whereas it grows back quickly after the treatment stops. (B) The evolution of the CSC fraction in the process. (C) The 3D morphology of the tumor at different stages of the treatment.
Figure 8Comparison of tumor development initiated from single CSCs with heterogeneous self-renewal ability. (A) Average size of tumors and (B) average CSC fractions of tumors initiated from a single CSC with relative low (0.25), medium (0.5) and high (0.75)self-renewal ability. (C) Average CSC fractions of tumors before and after chemo-drug treatment.