BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

David Basanta

David Basanta contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Populations and EvolutionTissues and OrgansComputational Engineering, Finance, and Science

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2015arXiv

Edge effects in game theoretic dynamics of spatially structured tumours

Background: Analysing tumour architecture for metastatic potential usually focuses on phenotypic differences due to cellular morphology or specific genetic mutations, but often ignore the cell's position within the heterogeneous substructure. Similar disregard for local neighborhood structure is common in mathematical models. Methods: We view the dynamics of disease progression as an evolutionary game between cellular phenotypes. A typical assumption in this modeling paradigm is that the probability of a given phenotypic strategy interacting with another depends exclusively on the abundance of those strategies without regard local heterogeneities. We address this limitation by using the Ohtsuki-Nowak transform to introduce spatial structure to the go vs. grow game. Results: We show that spatial structure can promote the invasive (go) strategy. By considering the change in neighbourhood size at a static boundary -- such as a blood-vessel, organ capsule, or basement membrane -- we show an edge effect that allows a tumour without invasive phenotypes in the bulk to have a polyclonal boundary with invasive cells. We present an example of this promotion of invasive (EMT positive) cells in a metastatic colony of prostate adenocarcinoma in bone marrow. Interpretation: Pathologic analyses that do not distinguish between cells in the bulk and cells at a static edge of a tumour can underestimate the number of invasive cells. We expect our approach to extend to other evolutionary game models where interaction neighborhoods change at fixed system boundaries.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

A mathematical model of tumor self-seeding reveals secondary metastatic deposits as drivers of primary tumor growth

Two models of circulating tumor cell (CTC) dynamics have been proposed to explain the phenomenon of tumor 'self-seeding', whereby CTCs repopulate the primary tumor and accelerate growth: Primary Seeding, where cells from a primary tumor shed into the vasculature and return back to the primary themselves; and Secondary Seeding, where cells from the primary first metastasize in a secondary tissue and form microscopic secondary deposits, which then shed cells into the vasculature returning to the primary. These two models are difficult to distinguish experimentally, yet the differences between them is of great importance to both our understanding of the metastatic process and also for designing methods of intervention. Therefore we developed a mathematical model to test the relative likelihood of these two phenomena in the subset of tumours whose shed CTCs first encounter the lung capillary bed, and show that Secondary Seeding is several orders of magnitude more likely than Primary seeding. We suggest how this difference could affect tumour evolution, progression and therapy, and propose several possible methods of experimental validation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Exploiting ecological principles to better understand cancer progression and treatment

A small but growing number of people are finding interesting parallels between ecosystems as studied by ecologists (think of a Savanna or the Amazon rain forest or a Coral reef) and tumours1-3. The idea of viewing cancer from an ecological perspective has many implications but fundamentally, it means that we should not see cancer just as a group of mutated cells. A more useful definition of cancer is to consider it a disruption in the complex balance of many interacting cellular and microenvironmental elements in a specific organ. This perspective means that organs undergoing carcinogenesis should be seen as sophisticated ecosystems in homeostasis that cancer cells can disrupt. It also makes cancer seem even more complex but may ultimately provides isights that make it more treatable. Here we discuss how ecological principles can be used to better understand cancer progression and treatment, using several mathematical and computational models to illustrate our argument.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Intrinsic cell factors that influence tumourigenicity in cancer stem cells - towards hallmarks of cancer stem cells

Since the discovery of a cancer initiating side population in solid tumours, studies focussing on the role of so-called cancer stem cells in cancer initiation and progression have abounded. The biological interrogation of these cells has yielded volumes of information about their behaviour, but there has, as of yet, not been many actionable generalised theoretical conclusions. To address this point, we have created a hybrid, discrete/continuous computational cellular automaton model of a generalised stem-cell driven tissue and explored the phenotypic traits inherent in the inciting cell and the resultant tissue growth. We identify the regions in phenotype parameter space where these initiating cells are able to cause a disruption in homeostasis, leading to tissue overgrowth and tumour formation. As our parameters and model are non-specific, they could apply to any tissue cancer stem-cell and do not assume specific genetic mutations. In this way, our model suggests that targeting these phenotypic traits could represent generalizable strategies across cancer types and represents a first attempt to identify the hallmarks of cancer stem cells.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Mathematical modeling of the metastatic process

Mathematical modeling in cancer has been growing in popularity and impact since its inception in 1932. The first theoretical mathematical modeling in cancer research was focused on understanding tumor growth laws and has grown to include the competition between healthy and normal tissue, carcinogenesis, therapy and metastasis. It is the latter topic, metastasis, on which we will focus this short review, specifically discussing various computational and mathematical models of different portions of the metastatic process, including: the emergence of the metastatic phenotype, the timing and size distribution of metastases, the factors that influence the dormancy of micrometastases and patterns of spread from a given primary tumor.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Investigating prostate cancer tumour-stroma interactions - clinical and biological insights from an evolutionary game

Tumours are made up of a mixed population of different types of cells that include normal struc- tures as well as ones associated with the malignancy, and there are multiple interactions between the malignant cells and the local microenvironment. These intercellular interactions, modulated by the microenvironment, effect tumour progression and represent a largely under appreciated therapeutic target. We use observations of primary tumor biology from prostate cancer to extrapolate a math- ematical model: specifically; it has been observed that in prostate cancer three disparate cellular outcomes predominate: (i) the tumour remains well differentiated and clinically indolent - in this case the local stromal cells may act to restrain the growth of the cancer; (ii) early in its genesis the tumour acquires a highly malignant phenotype, growing rapidly and displacing the original stromal population (often referred to as small cell prostate cancer) - these less common aggressive tumours are relatively independent of the local microenvironment; and, (iii) the tumour co-opts the local stroma - taking on a classic stromagenic phenotype where interactions with the local microenviron- ment are critical to the cancer growth. We present an evolutionary game theoretical construct that models the influence of tumour-stroma interactions in driving these outcomes. We consider three characteristic and distinct cellular populations: stromal cells, tumour cells that are self-reliant in terms of microenvironmental factors and tumour cells that depend on the environment for resources but can also co-opt stroma. Using evolutionary game theory we explore a number of different sce- narios that elucidate the impact of tumour-stromal interactions on the dynamics of prostate cancer growth and progression and how different treatments in the metastatic setting can affect different types of tumors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access