Enabling Evolutionary Therapy in metastatic cancer lacking serum biomarkers.

Authors

Eva Molnárová, Ties A Mulders, Marcela Spee-Dropková, Louise M Spekking, Sepinoud Azimi, Irene Grossmann, Anne-Marie C Dingemans, Kateřina Staňková

Published in

Journal of evolutionary biology. Sep 10, 2026. Epub Sep 10, 2026.

Abstract

Evolutionary therapy (ET) aims to anticipate and steer tumor evolution by adjusting treatment timing and dosing, often to control rather than eradicate tumor burden. Clinical use requires reliable monitoring of tumor dynamics to inform mathematical models that guide therapy. In cancers such as metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer and relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, ET models are informed by serial serum biomarkers. For cancers lacking reliable biomarkers, such as metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), radiographic imaging remains the primary method for treatment response assessment, typically using RECIST 1.1 criteria. RECIST, which tracks a limited number (up to five) of lesions with one-dimensional (1D) measurements and defines progression relative to the nadir, the smallest tumor burden recorded after treatment, was not designed to support ET. It may miss early regrowth, underrepresent tumor burden, and obscure disease trends. Using a virtual NSCLC patient model, we demonstrate that lesion selection and measurement dimensionality strongly affect progression detection. Two-dimensional metrics provide modest improvement, but only 3D volumetric measurements accurately capture both tumor burden and its dynamics, which are key requirements for ET. To support ET in cancers lacking biomarkers, response assessment must evolve beyond RECIST by integrating volumetric imaging, automated segmentation, and potentially liquid biopsies, alongside redefining progression criteria to enable adaptive, patient-centered treatments.

PMID:
42720421
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 10 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.