Over time, tumor treatment resistance inadvertently develops when androgen de-privation therapy (ADT) is applied to metastasized prostate cancer (PCa). To combat tumor resistance, while reducing the harsh side effects of hormone therapy, the clinician may opt to cyclically alternates the patient’s treatment on and off. This method,known as intermittent ADT, is an alternative to continuous ADT that improves the patient’s quality of life while testosterone levels recover between cycles. In this paper,we explore the response of intermittent ADT to metastasized prostate cancer by employing a previously clinical data validated mathematical model to new clinical data from patients undergoing Abiraterone therapy. This cell quota model, a system of ordinary differential equations constructed using Droop’s nutrient limiting theory, assumes the tumor comprises of castration-sensitive (CS) and castration-resistant (CR)cancer sub-populations. The two sub-populations rely on varying levels of intracellular androgen for growth, death and transformation. Due to the complexity of the model,we carry out sensitivity analyses to study the effect of certain parameters on their outputs, and to increase the identifiability of each patient’s unique parameter set. The model’s forecasting results show consistent accuracy for patients with sufficient data,which means the model could give useful information in practice, especially to decide whether an additional round of treatment would be effective.

Cancer rates vary between people, between cultures, and between tissue types, driven by clinically relevant distinctions in the risk factors that lead to different cancer types. Despite the importance of cancer location in human health, little is known about tissue-specific cancers in non-human animals. We can gain significant insight into how evolutionary history has shaped mechanisms of cancer suppression by examining how life history traits impact cancer susceptibility across species. Here, we perform multi-level analysis to test how species-level life history strategies are associated with differences in neoplasia prevalence, and apply this to mammary neoplasia within mammals. We propose that the same patterns of cancer prevalence that have been reported across species will be maintained at the tissue-specific level. We used a combination of factor analysis and phylogenetic regression on 13 life history traits across 90 mammalian species to determine the correlation between a life history trait and how it relates to mammary neoplasia prevalence. The factor analysis presented ways to calculate quantifiable underlying factors that contribute to covariance of entangled life history variables. A greater risk of mammary neoplasia was found to be correlated most significantly with shorter gestation length. With this analysis, a framework is provided for how different life history modalities can influence cancer vulnerability. Additionally, statistical methods developed for this project present a framework for future comparative oncology studies and have the potential for many diverse applications.

The purpose of this project is to analyze the current state of cancer nanomedicine and its challenges. Cancer is the second most deadly illness in the United States after heart disease. Nanomedicine, the use of materials between 1 and 100 nm to for the purpose of addressing healthcare-related problems, is particularly suited for treating it since nanoparticles have properties such as high surface area-to-volume ratios and favorable drug release profiles that make them more suitable for tasks such as consistent drug delivery to tumor tissue. The questions posed are: What are the current nanomedical treatments for cancer? What are the technical, social, and legal challenges related to nanomedical treatments and how can they be overcome? To answer the questions mentioned above, information from several scientific papers on nanomedical treatments for cancer as well as from social science journals was synthesized. Based on the findings, nanomedicine has a wide range of applications for cancer drug delivery, detection, and immunotherapy. The main technical challenge related to nanomedical treatments is navigating through biological barriers such as the mononuclear phagocyte system, the kidney, the blood-brain barrier, and the tumor microenvironment. Current approaches to meeting this challenge include altering the size, shape, and charge of nanoparticles for easier passage. The main social and legal challenge related to nanomedical treatments is the difficulty of regulating them due to factors such as the near impossibility of detecting nanowaste. Current approaches to meeting this challenge include the use of techniques such as scanning tunneling microscopy and atomic force microscopy to help distinguish nanowaste from the surroundings. More research will have to be done in these and other areas to enhance a major cancer-fighting tool.