Modeling the efficacy of different anti-angiogenic drugs on treatment of solid tumors using 3D computational modeling and machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate simulation of tumor growth during chemotherapy has significant potential to alleviate the risk of unknown side effects and optimize clinical trials. In this study, a 3D simulation model encompassing angiogenesis and tumor growth was developed to identify the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) concentration and visualize the formation of a microvascular network. Accordingly, three anti-angiogenic drugs (Bevacizumab, Ranibizumab, and Brolucizumab) at different concentrations were evaluated in terms of their efficacy. Moreover, comprehensive mechanisms of tumor cell proliferation and endothelial cell angiogenesis are proposed to provide accurate predictions for optimizing drug treatments. The evaluation of simulation output data can extract additional features such as tumor volume, tumor cell number, and the length of new vessels using machine learning (ML) techniques. These were investigated to examine the different stages of tumor growth and the efficacy of different drugs. The results indicate that brolucizuman has the best efficacy by decreasing the length of sprouting new vessels by up to 16%. The optimal concentration was obtained at 10 mol m−3 with an effectiveness percentage of 42% at 20 days post-treatment. Furthermore, by performing comparative analysis, the best ML method (matching the performance of the reference simulations) was identified as reinforcement learning with a 3.3% mean absolute error (MAE) and an average accuracy of 94.3%.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".