Identifying mechanisms driving the early response of triple negative breast cancer patients to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using a mechanistic model integrating in vitro and in vivo imaging data

Guillermo Lorenzo,Angela M. Jarrett,Christian T. Meyer,Vito Quaranta,Darren R. Tyson,Thomas E. Yankeelov
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.04270
2022-12-08
Tissues and Organs
Abstract:Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a standard-of-care treatment for locally advanced triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) before surgery. The early assessment of TNBC response to NAC would enable an oncologist to adapt the therapeutic plan of a non-responding patient, thereby improving treatment outcomes while preventing unnecessary toxicities. To this end, a promising approach consists of obtaining \textsl{in silico} personalized forecasts of tumor response to NAC \textsl{via} computer simulation of mechanistic models constrained with patient-specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data acquired early during NAC. Here, we present a model featuring the essential mechanisms of TNBC growth and response to NAC, including an explicit description of drug pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics. As longitudinal \textsl{in vivo} MRI data for model calibration is limited, we perform a sensitivity analysis to identify the model mechanisms driving the response to two NAC drug combinations: doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with carboplatin. The model parameter space is constructed by combining patient-specific MRI-based \textsl{in silico} parameter estimates and \textit{in vitro} measurements of pharmacodynamic parameters obtained using time-resolved microscopy assays of several TNBC lines. The sensitivity analysis is run in two MRI-based scenarios corresponding to a well-perfused and a poorly-perfused tumor. Out of the 15 parameters considered herein, only the baseline tumor cell net proliferation rate along with the maximum concentrations and effects of doxorubicin, carboplatin, and paclitaxel exhibit a relevant impact on model forecasts (total effect index, $S_T>$0.1). These results dramatically limit the number of parameters that require \textsl{in vivo} MRI-constrained calibration, thereby facilitating the clinical application of our model.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?