Quantitative Approaches to the Cancer Stem Cell Hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis, phenotype switching in cancer cell populations is modeled. We focus on the behavior of cells at the phenotypic level and present mathematical models to capture the results of available experiments. The models, based on the cancer stem cell hypothesis (in addition to the new concept of plasticity in tumor populations), are also employed to predict cancer cell growth in vitro and in vivo. \nThe models are analyzed in the two limits of large and small cell numbers. We use stochastic analysis to capture the random behavior of cells in the limit of low number as observed in mammosphere formation assays (MFAs). Stochastic analysis is employed to estimate quantities such as survival rate while the deterministic solution of the models is obtained to simulate the average behavior of cells. The importance of stochastic analysis and deterministic simulations is discussed in detail. \nThe primary purpose of the thesis is to highlight the importance of stochastic analysis in cancer stem cell experiments. The models are developed or modified based on the idea that both stochastic and deterministic behavior of cells should be considered simultaneously. In order to describe the behavior of the cells in cancer stem cell assays, the developed models are then used to investigate the possible experimental errors in the area and suggest possible filtration methods for corresponding experiments. In addition, the models are used to investigate the behavior of tumors under radiotherapy; and the effects of phenotype switching on the efficiency of therapies are investigated in the final part of the thesis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".