Skip to main content

Optimal Control of Mathematical Models for Antiangiogenic Treatments

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics ((IAM,volume 42))

Abstract

In the models considered so far, the focus was on the cancerous cells progressing from mathematical models for homogeneous tumor populations of chemotherapeutically sensitive cells to heterogeneous structures of cell populations with varying sensitivities or even resistance. From an optimal control point of view, optimal treatment schedules change from bang-bang solutions with upfront dosing (that correspond to classical MTD approaches in medicine) to administrations that also include singular controls (which correspond to time-varying dosing schedules at less than maximum rates) as heterogeneity of the tumor population becomes more prevalent. In this chapter, we begin to analyze mathematical models that also take into account a tumor’s microenvironment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Z. Agur, L. Arakelyan, P. Daugulis and Y. Ginosar, Hopf point analysis for angiogenesis models, Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, Series B, 4(1), (2004), pp. 29–38.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. T. Boehm, J. Folkman, T. Browder and M.S. O’Reilly, Antiangiogenic therapy of experimental cancer does not induce acquired drug resistance, Nature, 390, (1997), pp. 404–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. T. Browder, C.E. Butterfield, B.M. Kräling, B. Shi, B. Marshall, M.S. O’Reilly and J. Folkman, Antiangiogenic scheduling of chemotherapy improves efficacy against experimental drug-resistant cancer, Cancer Research, 60, (2000), pp. 1878–1886.

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Davis and G.D. Yancopoulos, The angiopoietins: Yin and Yang in angiogenesis, Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology, 237, (1999), pp. 173–185.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T.A. Drixler, I.H. Borel Rinkes, E.D. Ritchie, T.J. van Vroonhoven, M.F. Gebbink and E.E. Voest, Continuous administration of angiostatin inhibits accelerated growth of colorectal liver metastasies after partial hepatectomy, Cancer Research, 60, (2000), pp. 1761–1765.

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Ergun, K. Camphausen and L.M. Wein, Optimal scheduling of radiotherapy and angiogenic inhibitors, Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 65, (2003), pp. 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. J. Folkman, Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications, New England J. of Medicine, 295, (1971), pp. 1182–1196.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Folkman, Antiangiogenesis: new concept for therapy of solid tumors, Annals of Surgery, 175, (1972), pp. 409–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. J. Folkman and M. Klagsburn, Angiogenic factors, Science, 235, (1987), pp. 442–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. U. Forys, Y. Keifetz and Y. Kogan, Critical-point analysis for three-variable cancer angiogenesis models, Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering-MBE, 2(3), (2005), pp. 511–525.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. H. Gardner-Moyer, Sufficient conditions for a strong minimum in singular control problems, SIAM J. Control, 11 (1973), pp. 620–636.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. P. Hahnfeldt, D. Panigrahy, J. Folkman and L. Hlatky, Tumor development under angiogenic signaling: a dynamical theory of tumor growth, treatment response, and postvascular dormancy, Cancer Research, 59, (1999), pp. 4770–4775.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R.K. Jain, Normalizing tumor vasculature with anti-angiogenic therapy: a new paradigm for combination therapy, Nature Medicine, 7, (2001), pp. 987–989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. R.K. Jain and L.L. Munn, Vascular normalization as a rationale for combining chemotherapy with antiangiogenic agents, Principles of Practical Oncology, 21, (2007), pp. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R.S. Kerbel, A cancer therapy resistant to resistance, Nature, 390, (1997), pp. 335–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. O. Kisker, C.M. Becker, D. Prox, M. Fannon, R. d’Amato, E. Flynn, W.E. Fogler, B.K. Sim, E.N. Allred, S.R. Pirie-Shepherd and J. Folkman, Continuous administration of endostatin by intraperitoneally implanted osmotic pump improves the efficacy and potency of therapy in a mouse xenograft tumor model, Cancer Research, 61, (2001), pp. 7669–7674.

    Google Scholar 

  17. M. Klagsburn and S. Soker, VEGF/VPF: the angiogenesis factor found?, Current Biology, 3, (1993), pp. 699–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. U. Ledzewicz, J. Munden and H. Schättler, Scheduling of anti-angiogenic inhibitors for Gompertzian and logistic tumor growth models, Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, Series B, 12, (2009), pp. 415–439.

    Google Scholar 

  19. U. Ledzewicz, V. Oussa and H. Schättler, Optimal solutions for a model of tumor anti-angiogenesis with a penalty on the cost of treatment, Applicationes Mathematicae, 36(3), (2009), pp. 295–312.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. U. Ledzewicz and H. Schättler, A synthesis of optimal controls for a model of tumor growth under angiogenic inhibitors, Proc. of the 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Sevilla, Spain, December 2005, pp. 934–939.

    Google Scholar 

  21. U. Ledzewicz and H. Schättler, Optimal control for a system modelling tumor anti-angiogenesis, Proc. of the ICGST International Conference on Automatic Control and System Engineering, ACSE-05, Cairo, Egypt, December 2005, pp. 147–152.

    Google Scholar 

  22. U. Ledzewicz and H. Schättler, Application of optimal control to a system describing tumor anti-angiogenesis, Proc. of the 17th International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems (MTNS), Kyoto, Japan, July 2006, pp. 478-484.

    Google Scholar 

  23. U. Ledzewicz and H. Schättler, Antiangiogenic therapy in cancer treatment as an optimal control problem, SIAM J. on Control and Optimization, 46(3), (2007), pp. 1052–1079.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. U. Ledzewicz and H. Schättler, Analysis of a mathematical model for tumor anti-angiogenesis, Optimal Control, Applications and Methods, 29(1), (2008), pp. 41–57.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. U. Ledzewicz and H. Schättler, Effect of the Objective on Optimal Controls for a System Describing Tumor Anti-Angiogenesis, in: New Aspects of Systems, Part II, Proc. of the 12th WSEAS International Conference on Systems, Heraklion, Greece, July 2008, pp. 483-490

    Google Scholar 

  26. U. Ledzewicz and H. Schättler, On the optimality of singular controls for a class of mathematical models for tumor anti-angiogenesis, Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, Series B, 11 (3), (2009), pp. 691–715.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. A. d’Onofrio, Rapidly acting antitumoral anti-angiogenic therapies, Physical Review E, 76(3), art. no. 031920, (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  28. A. d’Onofrio and A. Gandolfi, Tumour eradication by antiangiogenic therapy: analysis and extensions of the model by Hahnfeldt et al. (1999), Mathematical Biosciences, 191, (2004), pp. 159–184.

    Google Scholar 

  29. A. d’Onofrio and A. Gandolfi, A family of models of angiogenesis and anti-angiogenesis anti-cancer therapy, Mathematical Medicine and Biology, 26, (2009), pp. 63–95, doi:10.1093/imammb/dqn024.

    Google Scholar 

  30. J. Poleszczuk and U. Forys, Derivation of the Hahnfeldt et al. model (1999) revisited, Proc. of the 16th National Conference on Applications of Mathematics in Biology and Medicine, Krynica, Poland, September 2010, pp. 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  31. H. Schättler and U. Ledzewicz, Geometric Optimal Control, Springer, New York, 2012.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. H. Schättler, U. Ledzewicz and B. Cardwell, Robustness of optimal controls for a class of mathematical models for tumor anti-angiogenesis, Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering- MBE, 8(2), (2011), pp. 355–369.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. A. Swierniak, Direct and indirect control of cancer populations, Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Technical Sciences, 56(4), (2008), pp. 367–378.

    Google Scholar 

  34. A. Swierniak, Comparison of control theoretic properties of models of antiangiogenic therapy, Proc. of the 6th International IASTED Conference on Biomedical Engineering, Acta Press, (2008), pp. 156–160.

    Google Scholar 

  35. A. Swierniak, A. d’Onofrio, A. Gandolfi, Optimal control problems related to tumor angiogenesis, Proc. IEEE-IECON’2006, pp. 667–681.

    Google Scholar 

  36. A. Swierniak, G. Gala, A. Gandolfi and A. d’Onofrio, Optimization of angiogenic therapy as optimal control problem, Proc. of the 4th IASTED Conference on Biomechanics, Acta Press, (M. Doblare, Ed.), (2006), pp. 56–60.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schättler, H., Ledzewicz, U. (2015). Optimal Control of Mathematical Models for Antiangiogenic Treatments. In: Optimal Control for Mathematical Models of Cancer Therapies. Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics, vol 42. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2972-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics