Mathematical modelling of clonal reduction therapeutic strategies in acute myeloid leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the years, the overall survival of older patients diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has not significantly increased. Although standard cytotoxic therapies that rapidly eliminate dividing myeloblasts are used to induce remission, relapse can occur due to surviving therapy-resistant leukemic stem cells (LSCs). Hence, anti-LSC strategies have become a key target to cure AML. We have recently shown that previously approved cardiac glycosides and glucocorticoids target LSC-enriched CD34+ cells in the primary human AML 8227 model with more efficacy than normal hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). To translate these in vitro findings into humans, we developed a mathematical model of stem cell dynamics that describes the stochastic evolution of LSCs in AML post-standard-of-care. To this, we integrated population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) models to investigate the clonal reduction potential of several promising candidate drugs in comparison to cytarabine, which is commonly used in high doses for consolidation therapy in AML patients. Our results suggest that cardiac glycosides (proscillaridin A, digoxin and ouabain) and glucocorticoids (budesonide and mometasone) reduce the expansion of LSCs through a decrease in their viability. While our model predicts that effective doses of cardiac glycosides are potentially too toxic to use in patients, simulations show the possibility of mometasone to prevent relapse through the glucocorticoid’s ability to drastically reduce LSC population size. This work therefore highlights the prospect of these treatments for anti-LSC strategies and underlines the use of quantitative approaches to preclinical drug translation in AML.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".