Search for: All records

Abstract Despite the revolutionary impact of immune checkpoint inhibition on cancer therapy, the lack of response in a subset of patients, as well as the emergence of resistance, remain significant challenges. Here we explore the theoretical consequences of the existence of multiple states of immune cell exhaustion on response to checkpoint inhibition therapy. In particular, we consider the emerging understanding that T cells can exist in various states: fully functioning cytotoxic cells, reversibly exhausted cells with minimal cytotoxicity, and terminally exhausted cells. We hypothesize that inflammation augmented by drug activity triggers transitions between these phenotypes, which can lead to non-genetic resistance to checkpoint inhibitors. We introduce a conceptual mathematical model, coupled with a standard 2-compartment pharmacometric (PK) model, that incorporates these mechanisms. Simulations of the model reveal that, within this framework, the emergence of resistance to checkpoint inhibitors can be mitigated through altering the dose and the frequency of administration. Our analysis also reveals that standard PK metrics do not correlate with treatment outcome. However, we do find that levels of inflammation that we assume trigger the transition from the reversibly to terminally exhausted states play a critical role in therapeutic outcome. A simulation of a population that has different values of this transition threshold reveals that while the standard high-dose, low-frequency dosing strategy can be an effective therapeutic design for some, it is likely to fail a significant fraction of the population. Conversely, a metronomic-like strategy that distributes a fixed amount of drug over many doses given close together is predicted to be effective across the entire simulated population, even at a relatively low cumulative drug dose. We also demonstrate that these predictions hold if the transitions between different states of immune cell exhaustion are triggered by prolonged antigen exposure, an alternative mechanism that has been implicated in this process. Our theoretical analyses demonstrate the potential of mitigating resistance to checkpoint inhibitors via dose modulation. 

Abstract Mathematical models are increasingly being developed and calibrated in tandem with data collection, empowering scientists to intervene in real time based on quantitative model predictions. Well-designed experiments can help augment the predictive power of a mathematical model but the question of when to collect data to maximize its utility for a model is non-trivial. Here we define data as model-informative if it results in a unique parametrization, assessed through the lens of practical identifiability. The framework we propose identifies an optimal experimental design (how much data to collect and when to collect it) that ensures parameter identifiability (permitting confidence in model predictions), while minimizing experimental time and costs. We demonstrate the power of the method by applying it to a modified version of a classic site-of-action pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model that describes distribution of a drug into the tumor microenvironment (TME), where its efficacy is dependent on the level of target occupancy in the TME. In this context, we identify a minimal set of time points when data needs to be collected that robustly ensures practical identifiability of model parameters. The proposed methodology can be applied broadly to any mathematical model, allowing for the identification of a minimally sufficient experimental design that collects the most informative data. 

Mathematical models of biological systems must strike a balance between being sufficiently complex to capture important biological features, while being simple enough that they remain tractable through analysis or simulation. In this work, we rigorously explore how to balance these competing interests when modeling murine melanoma treatment with oncolytic viruses and dendritic cell injections. Previously, we developed a system of six ordinary differential equations containing fourteen parameters that well describes experimental data on the efficacy of these treatments. Here, we explore whether this previously developed model is the minimal model needed to accurately describe the data. Using a variety of techniques, including sensitivity analyses and a parameter sloppiness analysis, we find that our model can be reduced by one variable and three parameters and still give excellent fits to the data. We also argue that our model is not too simple to capture the dynamics of the data, and that the original and minimal models make similar predictions about the efficacy and robustness of protocols not considered in experiments. Reducing the model to its minimal form allows us to increase the tractability of the system in the face of parametric uncertainty.