Best fitting tumor growth models of the von Bertalanffy-PütterType

Abstract

Background Longitudinal studies of tumor volume have used certain named mathematical growth models. The Bertalanffy-Pütter differential equation unifies them: It uses five parameters, amongst them two exponents related to tumor metabolism and morphology. Each exponent-pair defines a unique three-parameter model of the Bertalanffy-Pütter type, and the above-mentioned named models correspond to specific exponent-pairs. Amongst these models we seek the best fitting one. Method The best fitting model curve within the Bertalanffy-Pütter class minimizes the sum of squared errors (SSE). We investigate also near-optimal model curves; their SSE is at most a certain percentage (e.g. 1%) larger than the minimal SSE. Models with near-optimal curves are visualized by the region of their near-optimal exponent pairs. While there is barely a visible difference concerning the goodness of fit between the best fitting and the near-optimal model curves, there are differences in the prognosis, whence the near-optimal models are used to assess the uncertainty of extrapolation. Results For data about the growth of an untreated tumor we found the best fitting growth model which reduced SSE by about 30% compared to the hitherto best fit. In order to analyze the uncertainty of prognosis, we repeated the search for the optimal and near-optimal exponent-pairs for the initial segments of the data (meaning the subset of the data for the first n days) and compared the prognosis based on these models with the actual data (i.e. the data for the remaining days). The optimal exponent-pairs and the regions of near-optimal exponent-pairs depended on how many data-points were used. Further, the regions of near-optimal exponent-pairs were larger for the first initial segments, where fewer data were used. Conclusion While for each near optimal exponent-pair its best fitting model curve remained close to the fitted data points, the prognosis using these model curves differed widely for the remaining data, whence e.g. the best fitting model for the first 65 days of growth was not capable to inform about tumor size for the remaining 49 days. For the present data, prognosis appeared to be feasible for a time span of ten days, at most.

Bertalanffy-Pütter Models for the Growth of Tropical Trees and Stands

“…The data-fitting exercise for the BP-model is more challenging than for the Richards model, where standard optimization routines may run into difficulties [29]. In recent papers a method of data-fitting was developed for the BP-model [30] [31] [32] and [33]. This method was based on a grid-search, whereby we searched the best-fitting exponent-pairs (a, b) on a grid with step size 0.01 in both directions (Figure 1).…”

Growth pattern Learning for Unsupervised Extraction of Cancer Kinetics

“…In our analysis we chose four of the most representative and typically used scalar growth models, namely Logistic, von Bertalanffy, Gompertz and Holling, described in Table 1 and depicted in Figure 2. Despite their ubiquitous use, in either original form or embedded in more complex models [18], the aforementioned scalar tumor growth models are confined due to: a) the requirement of a precise biological description (i.e. values for α, β, λ and k correspond to biophysical processes); b) incapacity to describe the diversity of tumor types (i.e.…”

WAM to SeeSaw model for cancer therapy – overcoming LQM difficulties –

“…where k 0 is the growth rate, and N m is the maximum number of cells in a system in an organ, in vivo or a culture plate, in vitro. The existence of N m can be often recognized by many papers, for example (K€ uhleitner et al 2019;Mu et al 2003;Sachs et al 2001).…”