Why one-size-fits-all vaso-modulatory interventions fail to control glioma invasion: in silico insights

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate on the therapeutic potential of vaso-modulatory interventions against glioma invasion. Prominent vasculature-targeting therapies involve functional tumour-associated blood vessel deterioration and normalisation. The former aims at tumour infarction and nutrient deprivation medi- ated by vascular targeting agents that induce occlusion/collapse of tumour blood vessels. In contrast, the therapeutic intention of normalising the abnormal structure and function of tumour vascular net- works, e.g. via alleviating stress-induced vaso-occlusion, is to improve chemo-, immuno- and radiation therapy efficacy. Although both strategies have shown therapeutic potential, it remains unclear why they often fail to control glioma invasion into the surrounding healthy brain tissue. To shed light on this issue, we propose a mathematical model of glioma invasion focusing on the interplay between the mi- gration/proliferation dichotomy (Go-or-Grow) of glioma cells and modulations of the functional tumour vasculature. Vaso-modulatory interventions are modelled by varying the degree of vaso-occlusion. We discovered the existence of a critical cell proliferation/diffusion ratio that separates glioma invasion re- sponses to vaso-modulatory interventions into two distinct regimes. While for tumours, belonging to one regime, vascular modulations reduce the tumour front speed and increase the infiltration width, for those in the other regime the invasion speed increases and infiltration width decreases. We show how these in silico findings can be used to guide individualised approaches of vaso-modulatory treatment strategies and thereby improve success rates.