Drug-induced resistance evolution necessitates less aggressive treatment

Abstract

Increasing body of experimental evidence suggests that anticancer and antimicrobial therapies may themselves promote the acquisition of drug resistance by increasing mutability. The successful control of evolving populations requires that such biological costs of control are identified, quantified and included to the evolutionarily informed treatment protocol. Here we identify, characterise and exploit a trade-off between decreasing the target population size and generating a surplus of treatment-induced rescue mutations. We show that the probability of cure is maximized at an intermediate dosage, below the drug concentration yielding maximal population decay, suggesting that treatment outcomes may in some cases be substantially improved by less aggressive treatment strategies. We also provide a general analytical relationship that implicitly links growth rate, pharmacodynamics and dose-dependent mutation rate to an optimal control law. Our results highlight the important, but often neglected, role of fundamental eco-evolutionary costs of control. These costs can often lead to situations, where decreasing the cumulative drug dosage may be preferable even when the objective of the treatment is elimination, and not containment. Taken together, our results thus add to the ongoing criticism of the standard practice of administering aggressive, high-dose therapies and motivate further experimental and clinical investigation of the mutagenicity and other hidden collateral costs of therapies.

Poloxamer‐linked prodrug of a topoisomerase I inhibitor SN22 shows efficacy in models of high‐risk neuroblastoma with primary and acquired chemoresistance

“…As a result, the non-curatively treated high-risk disease is likely to recur in a multidrug-resistant form, with a major shift in chemosensitivity severely compromising the efficacy of rescue therapy. 53 The goal at this stage is, therefore, to maximize tumor regression and, whenever possible, to eliminate residual disease and to prevent its recurrence. 54 In accordance with this approach, PF108-[SN22] 2 achieved complete elimination of most IMR-32 tumors, in contrast to the transient response to irinotecan observed in this model.…”

Threshold-awareness in adaptive cancer therapy

“…The fact that these policies are recovered in feedback form makes this approach particularly suitable for optimization of adaptive therapies. But even though the use of general optimal control in cancer treatment is by now common [55], the same is not true for the more robust HJB-based methods, which so far have been used in only a handful of cancer-related applications [1, 7, 19, 25, 36, 42, 53]. This is partly due to the HJBs’ well-known curse of dimensionality : the rapid increase in computational costs when the system state becomes higher-dimensional.…”

Promoting self‐healing power and balancing immune response: a holistic, effective strategy of traditional Chinese medicine in treating COVID‐19

“…Similarly, antivirals, antifungals, and anti-parasitic drugs are facing drug-resistance problems. From the evolutionary point of view, it is inevitable for pathogens to develop resistance to antimicrobials because of selection pressure [97] .…”