pith. sign in

arxiv: 2404.06459 · v3 · submitted 2024-04-09 · 🧬 q-bio.PE

A hybrid discrete-continuum modelling approach for the interactions of the immune system with oncolytic viral infections

David Morselli , Marcello E. Delitala , Adrianne L. Jenner , Federico Frascoli This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 02:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.PE
keywords oncolytic virotherapyimmune systemhybrid modelingagent-based modelcontinuum limitchemoattractanttumor dynamicsviral infection
0
0 comments X

The pith

Too rapid an immune response decreases the success of oncolytic virotherapy.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper builds a hybrid stochastic agent-based model for cells and viruses coupled with a balance equation for chemoattractant to study immune interactions in tumors. It derives the continuum PDE limit and validates it against the discrete model, finding general agreement with some stochastic differences. Simulations across parameter ranges show that immune cells entering the tumor too early, prior to widespread viral infection, lower the therapy's ability to control cancer growth. This points to the importance of timing when pairing virotherapy with immune stimulation.

Core claim

The hybrid model shows traveling waves of the three populations, with uninfected proliferative cells trying to escape from the infected cells while immune cells infiltrate the tumour. Simulations demonstrate that a too rapid immune response, before the infection is well-established, appears to decrease the efficacy of the therapy.

What carries the argument

Hybrid discrete-continuum model coupling agent-based cell dynamics to a PDE for chemoattractant concentration that guides immune movement.

If this is right

  • Both models can produce oscillations in cell populations consistent with Hopf bifurcations in the underlying non-spatial system.
  • Stochastic effects in the agent-based model lead to behaviors that differ from the continuum approximation in some regimes.
  • Uninfected proliferative cells form escaping waves from the infected region while immune cells advance inward.
  • Caution is advised when combining oncolytic virotherapy with immunotherapy due to sensitivity to immune timing.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The finding implies that therapies could be optimized by temporarily suppressing early immune activity to allow viral propagation.
  • Real tumors with irregular shapes or heterogeneous immune infiltration might show even stronger dependence on response timing than the simulated cases.
  • Extending the model to include specific immune cell types or virus mutations could reveal additional timing windows for effective treatment.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen mathematical forms for immune recruitment, virus spread, and chemoattractant production are sufficiently representative of biology that the simulated timing effect applies outside the model.

What would settle it

Clinical or experimental data showing that speeding up the immune response early in oncolytic treatment does not reduce tumor reduction rates would disprove the central result.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2404.06459 by Adrianne L. Jenner, David Morselli, Federico Frascoli, Marcello E. Delitala.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic representation of the rules governing c [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: One parameter bifurcations in α, ζ and β of Eq. (3.1), with other parameters as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Numerical simulation of Eq. (3.1) with the paramet [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparisons of the scenarios with weak immune resp [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A single numerical simulation of the agent-based m [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Oscillations at the origin from numerical simulat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A single numerical simulation of the agent-based m [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a)-(b) A single numerical simulation of the agent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Tumour eradications of the agent-based model with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison between the sum of tumour cells obtain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: A single numerical simulation of the agent-based [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Numerical solutions of Eq. (2.8) with the paramet [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Oncolytic virotherapy, utilizing genetically modified viruses to combat cancer and trigger anti-cancer immune responses, has garnered significant attention in recent years. In our previous work arXiv:2305.12386, we developed a stochastic agent-based model elucidating the spatial dynamics of infected and uninfected cells within solid tumours. Building upon this foundation, we present a novel stochastic agent-based model to describe the intricate interplay between the virus and the immune system; the agents' dynamics are coupled with a balance equation for the concentration of the chemoattractant that guides the movement of immune cells. We formally derive the continuum limit of the model and carry out a systematic quantitative comparison between this system of PDEs and the individual-based model in two spatial dimensions. Furthermore, we describe the traveling waves of the three populations, with the uninfected proliferative cells trying to escape from the infected cells while immune cells infiltrate the tumour. Simulations show a good agreement between agent-based approaches and numerical results for the continuum model. Some parameter ranges give rise to oscillations of cell number in both models, in line with the behaviour of the corresponding nonspatial model, which presents Hopf bifurcations. Nevertheless, in some situations the behaviours of the two models may differ significantly, suggesting that stochasticity plays a key role in the dynamics. Our results highlight that a too rapid immune response, before the infection is well-established, appears to decrease the efficacy of the therapy and thus some care is needed when oncolytic virotherapy is combined with immunotherapy. This further suggests the importance of clinically improving the modulation of the immune response according to the tumour's characteristics and to the immune capabilities of the patients.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript extends a prior stochastic agent-based model (arXiv:2305.12386) of oncolytic virus spread in tumors by adding immune cell agents whose movement is guided by a chemoattractant field governed by a reaction-diffusion equation. It formally derives the corresponding continuum PDE system, performs quantitative comparisons between the individual-based and continuum models in two spatial dimensions, analyzes traveling waves of the three populations and the emergence of oscillations (linked to Hopf bifurcations in the non-spatial reduction), and reports that a too-rapid immune response before infection is established reduces therapeutic efficacy, implying caution when combining oncolytic virotherapy with immunotherapy.

Significance. The formal derivation of the continuum limit and the systematic 2D quantitative comparison between agent-based and PDE descriptions constitute clear technical strengths; good agreement is reported in several regimes, and stochastic effects are shown to produce qualitatively different outcomes in some parameter ranges. If the reported timing effect on efficacy proves robust under biologically calibrated parameters, the work would supply useful spatial insight into virus-immune-tumor interactions and a concrete hypothesis for clinical timing of combination therapies. At present the applied conclusion inherits the untested premise that the chosen immune recruitment and chemoattractant functional forms and parameter values are representative of real tumor kinetics.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (final paragraph) and the simulation-results section: the claim that 'a too rapid immune response, before the infection is well-established, appears to decrease the efficacy of the therapy' is obtained by varying immune recruitment and movement parameters, yet the manuscript provides neither literature-derived bounds on these rates nor calibration against experimental time-series data, nor systematic sensitivity sweeps demonstrating persistence of the timing effect across plausible ranges. Because this interpretation supplies the principal applied significance, the absence of such validation is load-bearing.
  2. [Quantitative comparison] The section on quantitative comparison between ABM and PDE: while good agreement is stated for some regimes, the manuscript does not report how the observed stochastic deviations (explicitly noted to produce significantly different behaviours in some situations) propagate into the specific timing conclusion; a quantitative assessment of whether the efficacy reduction survives ensemble averaging or persists only in the deterministic limit would be required to support the clinical statement.
minor comments (2)
  1. The reference to the non-spatial model and its Hopf bifurcations would benefit from an explicit citation or brief recap of the bifurcation analysis performed in the prior work, to make the connection self-contained.
  2. Notation for the immune recruitment and chemoattractant production terms could be clarified by listing the free parameters and their units in a dedicated table, consistent with the free-parameter list in the model description.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and positive assessment of the technical contributions of the work. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (final paragraph) and the simulation-results section: the claim that 'a too rapid immune response, before the infection is well-established, appears to decrease the efficacy of the therapy' is obtained by varying immune recruitment and movement parameters, yet the manuscript provides neither literature-derived bounds on these rates nor calibration against experimental time-series data, nor systematic sensitivity sweeps demonstrating persistence of the timing effect across plausible ranges. Because this interpretation supplies the principal applied significance, the absence of such validation is load-bearing.

    Authors: We agree that the applied interpretation would be strengthened by explicit bounds and calibration, which are absent from the current manuscript. The parameter variations were chosen to probe qualitative model behaviors across recruitment and sensitivity regimes rather than to match specific data. In revision we will (i) add a dedicated limitations paragraph stating the exploratory character of the timing conclusion and the absence of direct experimental calibration, (ii) perform and report additional systematic sensitivity sweeps over wider ranges of the immune recruitment and chemoattractant parameters, and (iii) explicitly link the observed efficacy reduction to stochastic effects visible only in the ABM. These changes will qualify the clinical statement without altering the core modeling results. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Quantitative comparison] The section on quantitative comparison between ABM and PDE: while good agreement is stated for some regimes, the manuscript does not report how the observed stochastic deviations (explicitly noted to produce significantly different behaviours in some situations) propagate into the specific timing conclusion; a quantitative assessment of whether the efficacy reduction survives ensemble averaging or persists only in the deterministic limit would be required to support the clinical statement.

    Authors: We accept that the propagation of stochastic deviations into the timing result requires explicit quantification. The efficacy reduction is observed in individual ABM realizations when rapid immune recruitment clears infected cells before spatial spread occurs; the corresponding PDE limit does not exhibit the same reduction. In the revised manuscript we will add ensemble statistics (mean and variance of clearance time and infected-cell fraction over 50–100 realizations) for the critical parameter sets. These new figures will show whether the reduction remains statistically significant after averaging or is primarily a stochastic phenomenon, thereby clarifying the support for the applied claim. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation to prior base model; new immune-timing results independent

full rationale

The paper cites its own prior arXiv:2305.12386 only for the underlying agent-based tumour-virus model. The present work adds an independent immune-chemoattractant module, formally derives the continuum PDE limit, performs new simulations, and draws the timing-efficacy conclusion directly from those simulations. No parameter is fitted inside this manuscript and then relabelled as a prediction, no self-citation is invoked to justify a uniqueness claim or ansatz, and the central claims do not reduce by construction to quantities already present in the cited prior work. This is the normal, non-circular case of incremental model extension.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on several standard biological rate parameters and the mean-field assumptions needed for the continuum limit; no new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • infection rate, immune recruitment rate, chemoattractant production rate, diffusion coefficients
    Typical reaction-diffusion parameters whose specific numerical values control the timing effect and oscillation behavior; chosen to produce the reported qualitative regimes.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The continuum limit of the agent-based rules exists and is given by the stated system of PDEs under suitable scaling.
    Invoked when the authors formally derive the PDE system from the stochastic agent model.
  • domain assumption The chosen functional forms for cell movement, infection, and immune chemotaxis capture the dominant biological mechanisms.
    Required to interpret simulation outcomes as relevant to real tumors.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5854 in / 1594 out tokens · 26468 ms · 2026-05-24T02:28:36.455628+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Ensemble optimal control for managing drug resistance in cancer therapies

    math.OC 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Ensemble optimal control on a competitive cell population model yields an 'Off-On' adaptive therapy strategy for prostate cancer that mimics active surveillance in simulations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 81 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Abdul-Rahman, S

    T. Abdul-Rahman, S. Ghosh, S. M. Badar, A. Nazir, G. B. Bamigb ade, N. Aji, P. Roy, H. kachani, N. Garg, L. Law al, Z. S. B. Bliss, A. A. Wireko, O. Atallah, F. T . Adebusoye, T. Teslyk, K. Sikora, 27 and V. Horbas , The paradoxical role of cytokines and chemokines at the tumo r microenvironment: a comprehensive review, European Journal of Medical Researc...

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Almeida, C

    L. Almeida, C. Audebert, E. Leschiera, and T. Lorenzi , A hybrid discrete–continuum modelling approach to explore the impact of T-cell infiltration on anti-tumour i mmune response, Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 84 (2022)

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Almuallem, D

    N. Almuallem, D. Trucu, and R. Eftimie , Oncolytic viral therapies and the delicate balance between virus- macrophage-tumour interactions: A mathematical approach , Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 18 (2021), p. 764 – 799

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    R. H. I. Andtbacka, F. Collichio, K. J. Harrington, M. R. Midd leton, G. Downey, K. ¨Ohrling, and H. L. Kaufman , Final analyses of optim: a randomized phase III trial of tali mogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in unr esectable stage III–IV melanoma , Journal for ImmunoTher- apy of Cancer, 7 (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Atsou, F

    K. Atsou, F. Anju `ere, V. M. Braud, and T. Goudon , A size and space structured model describing interactions of tumor cells with immune cells reveals cancer persistent e quilibrium states in tumorigenesis , Journal of Theoretical Biology, 490 (2020), p. 110163

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    A. A. Baabdulla and T. Hillen , Oscillations in a spatial oncolytic virus model , Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 86 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Blanchette and J

    P. Blanchette and J. G. Teodoro , A renaissance for oncolytic adenoviruses? , Viruses, 15 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Bubba, T

    F. Bubba, T. Lorenzi, and F. R. Macfarlane , From a discrete model of chemotaxis with volume-filling to a generalized Patlak–Keller–Segel model , Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physica l and Engineering Sciences, (2020)

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    Champagnat and S

    N. Champagnat and S. M ´el´eard, Invasion and adaptive evolution for individual-based spat ially structured popu- lations, Journal of Mathematical Biology, 55 (2007), pp. 147–188

    work page 2007

  10. [10]

    M. A. J. Chaplain, T. Lorenzi, and F. R. Macfarlane , Bridging the gap between individual-based and contin- uum models of growing cell populations , Journal of Mathematical Biology, 80 (2020), pp. 343–371

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    Charteris and E

    N. Charteris and E. Khain , Modeling chemotaxis of adhesive cells: Stochastic lattice approach and continuum description, New Journal of Physics, 16 (2014)

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    Chatzopoulos, V

    K. Chatzopoulos, V. Kotoula, K. Manoussou, K. Markou, K. Vla chtsis, N. Angouridakis, A. Nikolaou, M. V assilakopoulou, A. Psyrri, and G. Fountzilas , Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and CD8+ T cell subsets as prognostic markers in patients with surgically treated lar yngeal squamous cell carcinoma , Head and Neck Pathology, 14 (2020), p. 689 – 700

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    Conte, A

    M. Conte, A. Xella, R. T. Woodall, K. A. Cassady, S. Branciamo re, C. E. Brown, and R. C. Rockne , Car t-cell and oncolytic virus dynamics and determinants of combination therapy success for glioblastoma , Mathe- matical Biosciences, 389 (2025), p. 109531

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    A. K. Cooper and P. S. Kim , A cellular automata and a partial differential equation model of tumor–immune dynamics and chemotaxis , in Mathematical models of tumor-immune system dynamics, S pringer, 2014, pp. 21–46

    work page 2014

  15. [15]

    Desjardins, M

    A. Desjardins, M. Gromeier, J. E. Herndon, N. Beaubier, D. P. Bolognesi, A. H. Friedman, H. S. Friedman, F. McSherry, A. M. Muscat, S. Nair, K. B. Peters, D. Randazzo, J. H. Sampson, G. Vla- hovic, W. T. Harrison, R. E. McLendon, D. Ashley, and D. D. Big ner, Recurrent glioblastoma treated with recombinant poliovirus, New England Journal of Medicine, 379 ...

    work page 2018

  16. [16]

    S. R. Dunbar , Traveling wave solutions of diffusive Lotka–Volterra equati ons: a heteroclinic connection in R4, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, (1984) , pp. 557–594

    work page 1984

  17. [17]

    Duncan, R

    A. Duncan, R. Erban, and K. Zygalakis , Hybrid framework for the simulation of stochastic chemical kinetics, Journal of Computational Physics, 326 (2016), pp. 398–419

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Eftimie, J

    R. Eftimie, J. L. Bramson, and D. J. Earn , Interactions between the immune system and cancer: A brief r eview of non-spatial mathematical models , Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 73 (2011), p. 2 – 32. 28

    work page 2011

  19. [19]

    Eftimie, J

    R. Eftimie, J. Dushoff, B. W. Bridle, J. L. Bramson, and D. J. D . Earn , Multi-stability and multi-instability phenomena in a mathematical model of tumor-immune-virus in teractions, Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 73 (2011), pp. 2932–2961

    work page 2011

  20. [20]

    Eftimie and G

    R. Eftimie and G. Eftimie , Tumour-associated macrophages and oncolytic virotherapi es: A mathematical inves- tigation into a complex dynamics , Letters in Biomathematics, 5 (2018), p. S6 – S35

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Eftimie, C

    R. Eftimie, C. MacNamara, J. Dushoff, J. Bramson, and D. Earn , Bifurcations and chaotic dynamics in a tumour-immune-virus system , Mathematical Modelling of Natural Phenomena, 11 (2016), p . 65 – 85

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    C. E. Engeland, J. P. Heidbuechel, R. P. Araujo, and A. L. Jenn er, Improving immunovirotherapies: The intersection of mathematical modelling and experiments , ImmunoInformatics, 6 (2022), p. 100011

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    A. C. Filley and M. Dey , Immune system, friend or foe of oncolytic virotherapy? , Frontiers in Oncology, 7 (2017)

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    R. A. Fisher , The wave of advance of advantageous genes , Annals of Eugenics, 7 (1937), pp. 355–369

    work page 1937

  25. [25]

    Fountzilas, S

    C. Fountzilas, S. P atel, and D. Mahalingam , Review: Oncolytic virotherapy, updates and future directi ons, Oncotarget, 8 (2017), pp. 102617–102639

    work page 2017

  26. [26]

    Friedman and X

    A. Friedman and X. Lai , Combination therapy for cancer with oncolytic virus and che ckpoint inhibitor: A math- ematical model, PLOS ONE, 13 (2018), pp. 1–21

    work page 2018

  27. [27]

    Friedman, J

    A. Friedman, J. P. Tian, G. Fulci, E. A. Chiocca, and J. W ang , Glioma virotherapy: Effects of innate immune suppression and increased viral replication capaci ty, Cancer Research, 66 (2006), pp. 2314–2319

    work page 2006

  28. [28]

    Galon and D

    J. Galon and D. Bruni , Approaches to treat immune hot, altered and cold tumours wit h combination immunother- apies, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 18 (2019), p. 197 – 218

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    Y. Gao, Q. Zhou, Z. Matharu, Y. Liu, T. Kw a, and A. Revzin , A mathematical method for extracting cell secretion rate from affinity biosensors continuously monito ring cell activity , Biomicrofluidics, 8 (2014)

    work page 2014

  30. [30]

    J. Gong, M. M. Dos Santos, C. Finlay, and T. Hillen , Are more complicated tumour control probability models better?, Mathematical Medicine and Biology: A Journal of the IMA, 30 (2013), pp. 1–19

    work page 2013

  31. [31]

    Graw and A

    F. Graw and A. S. Perelson , Modeling viral spread , Annual Review of Virology, 3 (2016), pp. 555–572

    work page 2016

  32. [32]

    Hanahan and R

    D. Hanahan and R. A. Weinberg , Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation , cell, 144 (2011), pp. 646–674

    work page 2011

  33. [33]

    W. Hao, E. D. Crouser, and A. Friedman , Mathematical model of sarcoidosis , Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111 (2014), pp. 16065–16070

    work page 2014

  34. [34]

    J. He, F. Munir, D. Ragoonanan, W. Zaky, S. J. Khazal, P. Tew ar i, J. Fueyo, C. Gomez-Manzano, and H. Jiang , Combining CAR T cell therapy and oncolytic virotherapy for p ediatric solid tumors: A promising option , Immuno, 3 (2023), p. 37 – 56

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Hillen and K

    T. Hillen and K. P ainter , A user’s guide to PDE models for chemotaxis , Journal of Mathematical Biology, 58 (2009), p. 183 – 217

    work page 2009

  36. [36]

    Hillen and A

    T. Hillen and A. Sw an , The diffusion limit of transport equations in biology , Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 2167 (2016), p. 73 – 129

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    Iw ai, M

    Y. Iw ai, M. Ishida, Y. Tanaka, T. Okazaki, T. Honjo, and N. Min ato, Involvement of PD-L1 on tumor cells in the escape from host immune system and tumor immunotherap y by PD-L1 blockade , Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99 (2002 ), p. 12293 – 12297

    work page 2002

  38. [38]

    Jenner, A

    A. Jenner, A. Coster, P. Kim, and F. Frascoli , Treating cancerous cells with viruses: Insights from a mini mal model for oncolytic virotherapy , Letters in Biomathematics, 5 (2018), pp. S117–S136

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    A. L. Jenner, P. S. Kim, and F. Frascoli , Oncolytic virotherapy for tumours following a Gompertz gro wth law , Journal of Theoretical Biology, 480 (2019), pp. 129–140

    work page 2019

  40. [40]

    A. L. Jenner, M. Smalley, D. Goldman, W. F. Goins, C. S. Cobbs, R. B. Puchalski, E. A. Chiocca, S. Lawler, P. Macklin, A. Goldman, and M. Craig , Agent-based computational modeling of glioblastoma predicts that stromal density is central to oncolytic virus efficacy , iScience, 25 (2022). 29

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Jin, W.-L

    K.-T. Jin, W.-L. Du, Y.-Y. Liu, H.-R. Lan, J.-X. Si, and X.-Z. Mou, Oncolytic virotherapy in solid tumors: The challenges and achievements , Cancers, 13 (2021), pp. 1–28

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    S. T. Johnston, M. J. Simpson, and R. E. Baker , Modelling the movement of interacting cell populations: A moment dynamics approach , Journal of Theoretical Biology, 370 (2015), pp. 81–92

    work page 2015

  43. [43]

    L. D. Ke, Y.-X. Shi, S.-A. Im, X. Chen, and W. A. Yung , The relevance of cell proliferation, vascular endothelial growth factor, and basic fibroblast growth factor productio n to angiogenesis and tumorigenicity in human glioma cell lines, Clinical Cancer Research, 6 (2000), pp. 2562–2572

    work page 2000

  44. [44]

    Kelly and S

    E. Kelly and S. Russell , History of oncolytic viruses: Genesis to genetic engineeri ng, Molecular Therapy, 15 (2007)

    work page 2007

  45. [45]

    Kim, Y.-S

    J.-H. Kim, Y.-S. Lee, H. Kim, J.-H. Huang, A.-R. Yoon, and C.- O. Yun , Relaxin expression from tumor- targeting adenoviruses and its intratumoral spread, apopt osis induction, and efficacy , Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 98 (2006), pp. 1482–1493

    work page 2006

  46. [46]

    Y. Kim, J. Y. Yoo, T. J. Lee, J. Liu, J. Yu, M. A. Caligiuri, B. Ka ur, and A. Friedman , Complex role of NK cells in regulation of oncolytic virus–bortezomib thera py, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115 (2018), p. 4927 – 4932

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    A. N. Kolmogorov, I. G. Petrovskii, and N. S. Piskunov , ´Etude de l’´ equation de la diffusion avec croissance de la quantit´ e de mati` ere et son application ` a un probl` em e biologique , Moscow University Mathematics Bulletin, Sec. A, 1 (1937), pp. 1–26

    work page 1937

  48. [48]

    N. L. Komarova and D. Wodarz , ODE models for oncolytic virus dynamics , Journal of theoretical biology, 263 (2010), pp. 530–543

    work page 2010

  49. [49]

    Krabbe, J

    T. Krabbe, J. Marek, T. Groll, K. Steiger, R. M. Schmid, A. M. K rackhardt, and J. Altomonte , Adoptive T cell therapy is complemented by oncolytic viroth erapy with fusogenic VSV-NDV in combination treatment of murine melanoma , Cancers, 13 (2021), p. 1 – 18

    work page 2021

  50. [50]

    S. E. Lawler, M.-C. Speranza, C.-F. Cho, and E. A. Chiocca , Oncolytic viruses in cancer treatment: A review, JAMA Oncology, 3 (2017), pp. 841–849

    work page 2017

  51. [51]

    T. Lee, A. L. Jenner, P. S. Kim, and J. Lee , Application of control theory in a delayed-infection and im mune- evading oncolytic virotherapy , Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 17 (2020), p. 2 361 – 2383

    work page 2020

  52. [52]

    R. J. LeVeque , Finite difference methods for ordinary and partial differentia l equations: Steady-state and time- dependent problems, SIAM, Philadelphia, 2007

    work page 2007

  53. [53]

    Lodish, A

    H. Lodish, A. Berk, C. A. Kaiser, C. Kaiser, M. Krieger, M. P. S cott, A. Bretscher, H. Ploegh, P. Matsudaira, et al. , Molecular cell biology , Macmillan, New York, 2008

    work page 2008

  54. [54]

    Lorenzi, P

    T. Lorenzi, P. J. Murray, and M. Ptashnyk , From individual-based mechanical models of multicellular systems to free-boundary problems , Interfaces and Free Boundaries, 22 (2020), pp. 205–244

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    F. R. Macfarlane, X. Ruan, and T. Lorenzi , Individual-based and continuum models of phenotypically h etero- geneous growing cell populations , AIMS Bioengineering, 9 (2022), pp. 68–92

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    K. J. Mahasa, R. Ouifki, A. Eladdadi, and L. de Pillis , A combination therapy of oncolytic viruses and chimeric antigen receptor T cells: A mathematical model pro of-of-concept, Mathematical Biosciences and Engineer- ing, 19 (2022), p. 4429 – 4457

    work page 2022

  57. [57]

    N. T. Martin and J. C. Bell , Oncolytic virus combination therapy: Killing one bird with two stones , Molecular Therapy, 26 (2018), p. 1414 – 1422

    work page 2018

  58. [58]

    Matzavinos, M

    A. Matzavinos, M. A. Chaplain, and V. A. Kuznetsov , Mathematical modelling of the spatio-temporal response of cytotoxic T-lymphocytes to a solid tumour , Mathematical Medicine and Biology, 21 (2004), pp. 1–34

    work page 2004

  59. [59]

    Morselli, Github repository: Immunovirotherapy-discrete-continuum

    D. Morselli, Github repository: Immunovirotherapy-discrete-continuum. https://github.com/davidmorselli/Immunovirotherapy- 2026

    work page 2026

  60. [60]

    Morselli, M

    D. Morselli, M. E. Delitala, and F. Frascoli , Agent-based and continuum models for spatial dynamics of infection by oncolytic viruses , Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 85 (2023). 30

    work page 2023

  61. [61]

    Morselli, F

    D. Morselli, F. Frascoli, and M. E. Delitala , The role of viral dynamics and infectivity in models of oncol ytic virotherapy for tumours with different motility . Preprint, 2025

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    A. S. Novozhilov, F. S. Berezovskaya, E. V. Koonin, and G. P. K arev, Mathematical modeling of tumor therapy with oncolytic viruses: Regimes with complete tumo r eination within the framework of deterministic models , Biology Direct, 1 (2006), pp. 1–18

    work page 2006

  63. [63]

    H. G. Othmer and T. Hillen , The diffusion limit of transport equations II: Chemotaxis equ ations, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 62 (2002), p. 1222 – 1250

    work page 2002

  64. [64]

    J. S. O’Donnell, M. W. L. Teng, and M. J. Smyth , Cancer immunoediting and resistance to t cell-based immunotherapy, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, 16 (2018), p. 151–167

    work page 2018

  65. [65]

    K. J. P ainter, Mathematical models for chemotaxis and their applications in self-organisation phenomena , Journal of Theoretical Biology, 481 (2019), p. 162 – 182

    work page 2019

  66. [66]

    C. J. Penington, B. D. Hughes, and K. A. Landman , Building macroscale models from microscale probabilistic models: A general probabilistic approach for nonlinear diffu sion and multispecies phenomena , Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 84 (2011)

    work page 2011

  67. [67]

    Pooladvand, C.-O

    P. Pooladvand, C.-O. Yun, A.-R. Yoon, P. S. Kim, and F. Frasco li, The role of viral infectivity in oncolytic virotherapy outcomes: A mathematical study , Mathematical Biosciences, 334 (2021), p. 108520

    work page 2021

  68. [68]

    Russell and K.-W

    L. Russell and K.-W. Peng , The emerging role of oncolytic virus therapy against cancer , Chinese Clinical On- cology, 7 (2018)

    work page 2018

  69. [69]

    Sheng Guo , The impact of hypoxia on oncolytic virotherapy , Virus Adaptation and Treatment, 3 (2011), p

    Z. Sheng Guo , The impact of hypoxia on oncolytic virotherapy , Virus Adaptation and Treatment, 3 (2011), p. 71 – 82

    work page 2011

  70. [70]

    T. Shi, X. Song, Y. W ang, F. Liu, and J. Wei , Combining oncolytic viruses with cancer immunotherapy: Establishing a new generation of cancer treatment , Frontiers in Immunology, 11 (2020)

    work page 2020

  71. [71]

    C. A. Smith and C. A. Yates , Spatially extended hybrid methods: A review , Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 15 (2018), p. 20170931

    work page 2018

  72. [72]

    K. M. Storey and T. L. Jackson , An agent-based model of combination oncolytic viral therap y and anti-PD-1 immunotherapy reveals the importance of spatial location w hen treating glioblastoma , Cancers, 13 (2021)

    work page 2021

  73. [73]

    K. M. Storey, S. E. Lawler, and T. L. Jackson , Modeling oncolytic viral therapy, immune checkpoint inhib ition, and the complex dynamics of innate and adaptive immunity in g lioblastoma treatment, Frontiers in Physiology, 11 (2020)

    work page 2020

  74. [74]

    Surendran, A

    A. Surendran, A. L. Jenner, E. Karimi, B. Fiset, D. F. Quail, L . A. W alsh, and M. Craig , Agent- based modelling reveals the role of the tumor microenvironm ent on the short-term success of combination temozolo- mide/immune checkpoint blockade to treat glioblastoma , Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 387 (2023), p. 66 – 77

    work page 2023

  75. [75]

    Textor, A

    J. Textor, A. Peixoto, S. E. Henrickson, M. Sinn, U. H. Von And rian, and J. Westermann , Defining the quantitative limits of intravital two-photon lymphocyte t racking, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108 (2011), p. 12401 – 12406

    work page 2011

  76. [76]

    Vithanage, H.-C

    G. Vithanage, H.-C. Wei, and S. R.-J. Jang , The role of tumor activation and inhibition with saturation effects in a mathematical model of tumor and immune system interacti ons undergoing oncolytic viral therapy , Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences, 46 (2023), p. 10787 – 10813

    work page 2023

  77. [77]

    A. Wing, C. A. F ajardo, A. D. Posey, C. Shaw, T. Da, R. M. Young, R. Alemany, C. H. June, and S. Guedan , Improving CART-cell therapy of solid tumors with oncolytic virus–driven production of a bispecific T-cell engager , Cancer Immunology Research, 6 (2018), p. 605 – 616

    work page 2018

  78. [78]

    Wodarz , Viruses as antitumor weapons: Defining conditions for tumor remission, Cancer Research, 61 (2001), pp

    D. Wodarz , Viruses as antitumor weapons: Defining conditions for tumor remission, Cancer Research, 61 (2001), pp. 3501–3507

    work page 2001

  79. [79]

    Wojton and B

    J. Wojton and B. Kaur , Impact of tumor microenvironment on oncolytic viral therap y, Cytokine and Growth Factor Reviews, 21 (2010), pp. 127–134. 31

    work page 2010

  80. [80]

    J. T. Wu, D. H. Kirn, and L. M. Wein , Analysis of a three-way race between tumor growth, a replica tion-competent virus and an immune response , Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 66 (2004), pp. 605–625

    work page 2004

Showing first 80 references.