- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Haeno, H.
- Articles by Michor, F.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Haeno, H.
- Articles by Michor, F.
Genetics, Vol. 177, 2209-2221, December 2007, Copyright © 2007
doi:10.1534/genetics.107.078915
The Evolution of Two Mutations During Clonal Expansion
Hiroshi Haeno*,
Yoh Iwasa* and
Franziska Michor
,1
* Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812-8581, Japan and
Society of Fellows, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
1 Corresponding author: Computational Biology Center, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065.
E-mail: michorf{at}mskcc.org
>ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
Knudson's two-hit hypothesis proposes that two genetic changes in the RB1 gene are the rate-limiting steps of retinoblastoma. In the inherited form of this childhood eye cancer, only one mutation emerges during somatic cell divisions while in sporadic cases, both alleles of RB1 are inactivated in the growing retina. Sporadic retinoblastoma serves as an example of a situation in which two mutations are accumulated during clonal expansion of a cell population. Other examples include evolution of resistance against anticancer combination therapy and inactivation of both alleles of a metastasis-suppressor gene during tumor growth. In this article, we consider an exponentially growing population of cells that must evolve two mutations to (i) evade treatment, (ii) make a step toward (invasive) cancer, or (iii) display a disease phenotype. We calculate the probability that the population has evolved both mutations before it reaches a certain size. This probability depends on the rates at which the two mutations arise; the growth and death rates of cells carrying none, one, or both mutations; and the size the cell population reaches. Further, we develop a formula for the expected number of cells carrying both mutations when the final population size is reached. Our theory establishes an understanding of the dynamics of two mutations during clonal expansion.
THE concept of a tumor-suppressor gene originated from a statistical analysis of retinoblastoma incidence (KNUDSON 1971). This and later work (MOOLGAVKAR and KNUDSON 1981; FRIEND et al. 1986; VOGELSTEIN and KINZLER 2002) led to Knudson's two-hit hypothesis suggesting that retinoblastoma develops due to the inactivation of both alleles of the RB1 gene. The inherited form of the disease results from a germ-line mutation in one allele followed by inactivation of the second allele during somatic cell divisions. In sporadic retinoblastoma, both mutations arise during retina development. An understanding of the tumorigenesis of sporadic retinoblastoma requires the study of the dynamics of RB1 mutations during the growth of the retina. What is the chance that both alleles have been inactivated before the retina reaches its final size? How does this probability scale with mutation rates and cell turnover? And how large is a retinoblastoma tumor expected to be?
Tumor metastasis is a significant contributor to death in cancer patients. Metastases arise when cancer cells leave the primary tumor site and form new colonies elsewhere (CHAMBERS et al. 2002). Metastasis formation can be driven by genetic alteration of many genes, including activation of oncogenes like RAS and MYC (POZZATTI et al. 1986; WYLLIE et al. 1987) and inactivation of metastasis-suppressor genes such as NM23 (STEEG et al. 1988; STEEG 2004). Metastasis suppressors maintain the normal, noninvasive state of cells, and their inactivation promotes metastasis formation. It is clinically relevant to know whether a growing tumor has already inactivated a metastasis suppressor when it is diagnosed. What is the probability that a clonally expanding tumor cell population has accumulated two mutations in a metastasis suppressor gene before detection? How many metastasis-enabled cells does such a tumor contain?
Acquired drug resistance is a threat for the successful treatment of cancer (GOTTESMAN 2002). Depending on therapy, the type of cancer, and its stage, one or several (epi)genetic alterations are necessary to confer resistance to treatment. Some mechanisms of resistance require two genetic alterations—either because of haplosufficiency of a gene such that one recessive mutation cannot confer resistance or because of the use of combination therapy that targets two different positions in the cancer genome. Examples of the former are inactivation of p53, ATM, and RB1 (LOWE et al. 1994; VOLM and STAMMLER 1996; WESTPHAL et al. 1997). An example of the latter is emerging resistance of chronic myeloid leukemia cells against combination therapy with imatinib (Gleevec, STI571) and dasatinib (BMS-35482) (SHAH et al. 2004, 2007). Although both agents target the BCR–ABL kinase domain, the spectra of mutations conferring resistance to these drugs do not overlap—apart from one point mutation, which causes resistance to both (TOKARSKI et al. 2006). It is important to know whether patients already have resistant cells at diagnosis because this determines treatment strategies.
These examples lead to the following two questions: (i) What is the probability that an exponentially expanding cell population evolves two mutations before reaching a certain size?, and (ii) What is the expected number of such cells at that time? In this article, we study the dynamics of two mutations emerging in a growing population of cells. Earlier, we analyzed the dynamics of one mutation arising during clonal expansion (IWASA et al. 2006) as well as the dynamics of two mutations emerging in a population of constant size (MICHOR and IWASA 2006). Our studies are akin to Luria and Delbrück's investigation of the mutations conferring bacterial resistance to phages (LURIA and DELBRÜCK 1943). The distribution of mutants in an exponentially growing population is known as the Luria–Delbrück distribution and has been studied extensively (TLSTY et al. 1989; ZHENG 1999; FRANK 2003). These studies are based on pure birth processes and neglect the possibility of cell death. In most situations in cancer, disease, and development, however, cell death does occur. Therefore, we introduce a birth-and-death model and calculate the probability that both mutations have arisen once the population reaches its final size, as well as the expected number of such cells at that time. This work is part of a growing effort to study cancer with mathematical techniques (NORDLING 1953; ARMITAGE and DOLL 1954, 1957; FISHER 1959; GOLDIE and COLDMAN 1979; MOOLGAVKAR and KNUDSON 1981; LUEBECK and MOOLGAVKAR 2002; MICHOR et al. 2004, 2005; WODARZ and KOMAROVA 2005; IWASA et al. 2006; MICHOR and IWASA 2006).
ABSTRACT
>THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
|
The cell population follows a continuous-time branching process. Denote the growth rates of type-0, type-1, and type-2 cells by r, a1, and a2 and their death rates by d, b1, and b2. If a1>r, then the first mutation is advantageous and increases the fitness of the cell; if a1 = r, then the first mutation is neutral and does not change the fitness; and if
, then the mutation is disadvantageous and decreases the fitness of the cell. Similar comparisons apply to the fitness of type-2 cells. Detection occurs once the total population size—the sum of the number of type-0, type-1, and type-2 cells—reaches size M.
Computer simulations:
We perform exact computer simulations of the stochastic process. There are three types of cells: type-0, type-1, and type-2 cells. Their respective numbers are denoted by x, y, and z. A change in x, y, and z occurs by cell division (possibly with mutation) or by cell death. Initially, there is one type-0 cell, x = 1, and no mutant cell, y = z = 0.
The stochastic simulation is performed by first determining which of the possible events (production or death of a type-0, a type-1, or a type-2 cell) is likely to occur first; the chance of each event to be first is proportional to its rate normalized by the sum of the rates of all possible events. Let us denote this sum by R. Then the timing of the first event is given by a negative exponential distribution with mean 1/R. The process is continued either until all cells go extinct,
, or until the total cell number reaches the final size,
. The transition probabilities between states are determined as follows. The number of type-0 cells increases if a type-0 cell divides without mutating. Hence the probability that the number of type-0 cells increases by one is given by
![]() | (1a) |
. The number of type-1 cells increases by mutation of a type-0 cell or by division of a type-1 cell without mutation. The probability that the number of type-1 cells increases by one is given by
![]() | (1b) |
![]() | (1c) |
![]() | (1d) |
For each parameter set, we perform many independent runs of the stochastic process to account for random fluctuations and count the fraction of runs that reach the final size, M, and have produced at least one type-2 cell. We also record the number of type-2 cells in those runs.
The probability of two mutations:
Let us now derive an analytic expression for the probability that an exponentially growing population, starting from one type-0 cell, has produced at least one type-2 cell until the total population size reaches M. For simplicity, we assume that the death rates are constant across cell types,
.
Branching-process formula:
Let us first use a multistate branching process to calculate the probability of two mutations. This calculation is based on the assumption that the number of type-1 and type-2 cells is much smaller than the number of type-0 cells; hence we adopt the approximation that the final population size is reached once the number of type-0 cells becomes M. This approach represents an extension of earlier work (IWASA et al. 2006). The calculation is subdivided into two parts: (i) considering the number of type-1 cells produced from the exponentially expanding population of type-0 cells and (ii) studying the behavior of a cell lineage originating from a single type-1 cell. The generating function of the total number of type-2 cells is given by
![]() | (2) |
is the generating function of a lineage starting from a single type-1 cell, and Rx is the expected number of newly created type-1 cells when there are x type-0 cells; it is given by
(IWASA et al. 2006).
The generating function, Equation 2, can be used to calculate important quantities. The probability that there are no type-2 cells—irrespective of the number of type-1 cells—once the total population size reaches M is given by
![]() | (3) |
![]() | (4) |
and the derivation of the probability of two mutations in the neutral case,
, which is given by
![]() | (5) |
Let us now compare Equation 5 with the direct computer simulation. Figure 2 shows that the prediction of Equation 5 (solid curve) is a slight overestimation of the probability of two mutations represented by the results of the direct computer simulation (open circles). The formula for deleterious mutations is more accurate, while the formula for advantageous mutations gives a significant overestimation (data not shown). The deviation stems from the assumption of the analytic solution that the final population size is reached once there are M type-0 cells, rather than once the sum of type-0, type-1, and type-2 cells reaches M. This assumption leads to accurate predictions of the probability of having type-1 cells (IWASA et al. 2006), but to an overestimation of the probability of having type-2 cells—particularly if type-1 cells have a fitness advantage and can reach significant fractions of the final population size. Therefore, we consider a different analytic approach in the following.
|
Alternative formula:
Let us consider the two steps required for the emergence of type-2 cells: (i) production of a type-1 cell and the survival of its lineage and (ii) production of a type-2 cell and its persistence. Denote by
the probability that the first step occurs when there are x type-0 cells. With
, we have
![]() | (6) |
, where y is the abundance of type-1 cells at detection. Therefore the probability, Qx, of producing a type-2 cell in a type-1 cell lineage is given by
![]() | (7) |
, and
is the time between the emergence of a type-1 cell from x type-0 cells and when the total number of type-0 and type-1 cells reaches M. See APPENDIX B for the formula of
and the derivation of Qx.
With these results, the probability that there is at least one type-2 cell when the total population size reaches M is given by
![]() | (8) |
), we can simplify Equation 8 as
![]() | (9) |
Let us now compare Equation 8 with the stochastic computer simulation. Figure 3 shows the agreement between the predictions of the formula (dots) and the results of the simulation (open circles). The model includes seven parameters: the population size at detection (M), the probability of mutating either genomic position per cell division (u1 and u2), the growth rate of type-0, type-1, and type-2 cells (r, a1, and a2), and the death rate (d). If the four rates r, a1, a2, and d are multiplied by the same factor, then the whole process proceeds faster but the probability P remains constant. Hence P is determined by the three ratios a1/r, a2/r, and d/r rather than by the four rates independently. In the following analysis of the parameter dependence, we examine the case with r = 1 (without loss of generality) and consider the formula in which a1, a2, and d are replaced by a1/r, a2/r, and d/r, respectively:
- Probability of mutating the first position, u1: As shown in Figure 3a, the probability of two mutations, P, increases with u1. High values of u1 increase the risk of producing a type-1 cell lineage that can eventually give rise to type-2 cells.
- Probability of mutating the second position, u2: As shown in Figure 3b, the probability of two mutations, P, increases with u2. High values of u2 increase the chance that type-2 cells emerge.
- Relative growth rate of type-1 cells, a1/r: As shown in Figure 3, a and b, the probability of two mutations, P, increases with a1/r: A larger growth rate of type-1 cells relative to that of type-0 cells enhances the chance of two mutations because type-1 cells can reach higher frequencies.
- Relative growth rate of type-2 cells, a2/r: The probability of two mutations, P, is almost independent of the relative growth rate of type-2 cells, a2/r (data not shown). This effect emerges because here we focus on the existence of type-2 cells rather than on their abundance. The growth rate of type-2 cells does not significantly affect the probability of successfully establishing a lineage from a single cell; as long as the growth rate is clearly greater than the death rate, the newly produced mutant will almost certainly survive. Once a lineage of type-2 cells has emerged, the growth rate of type-2 cells has no effect on the chance of their existence once the population reaches its final size—it does, however, have an important effect on their abundance, as discussed later.
- Relative death rate, d/r: As shown in Figure 3c, the probability of two mutations, P, increases with d/r. A large death rate prolongs the time it takes until the total population reaches size M. It increases the number of cell divisions and therefore enhances the chance of accumulating mutations.
- Final population size, M: As shown in Figure 3c, the probability of two mutations, P, increases almost linearly with M. This effect emphasizes the importance of detecting a growing population of cancer cells as early as possible to reduce the risk of having evolved two mutations.
|
We performed a regression analysis of Equation 8 to analyze the sensitivity of the probability P with respect to the parameters. Using many different parameter sets, we obtained the following regression formula:
![]() | (10) |
is the largest among all terms, implying that an increase in the growth rate of type-1 cells most effectively enhances the risk of two mutations. Note also that the coefficient for
is positive, signifying that a higher death rate increases the risk. A larger death rate necessitates a larger number of cell divisions to reach a certain population size, and hence the chance of mutations increases. Finally, Equation 10 indicates that P decreases with the growth rate of type-0 cells, r. Hence a large growth rate of type-0 cells reduces the risk of two mutations—fast-growing tumors are more likely to be sensitive to treatment than slowly growing ones.
The expected number of cells with two mutations:
Let us now calculate the expected mean number of type-2 cells once the population reaches its final size.
Branching-process formula:
The mean number of type-2 cells in a lineage starting from a single type-1 cell is calculated from Equations 2 and A1 by taking the derivative with respect to s2 and setting
. According to the calculation in APPENDIX C, we have
![]() | (11) |
and
. In the neutral case,
and
, the difference between
and
becomes very small,
, and we can approximate Equation 11 by
![]() | (12) |
(IWASA et al. 2006). Then we have
![]() | (13) |
and
, which is
![]() | (14) |
![]() | (15) |
A comparison between the formula and the direct computer simulation shows that the formula is accurate for neutral mutations (Table 1), but tends to overestimate the number of type-2 cells when the mutations are advantageous (data not shown) for the same reason as above. Therefore, we again consider an alternative approach.
|
Alternative formula:
Note that we have already derived the probability of type-2 cells (P) and the number of type-1 cells (y) once the final population size is reached, as well as the length of time between the emergence of type-1 cells and when the sum of type-0 and type-1 cells reaches M (
). Denote by Z the number of type-2 cells once the final size is reached. If we adopt the assumption that type-2 cells experience deterministic growth, then the number Z is determined by the time of emergence of the first type-2 cell. Hence the probability that the number of type-2 cells, Z, is between z1 and z2 equals the probability that the first type-2 cells emerges between times t1 and t2 (for a schematic explanation, see Figure 4). Then we obtain a formula for
and can further derive the mean number of type-2 cells,
(see APPENDIX D).
|
The probability distribution of the number of type-2 cells is shown in Figure 5. The prediction of Equation D4 (red line) is in good agreement with the results of the computer simulation (black dots, see APPENDIX D for details). Table 2 shows the parameter dependence of the expected number of type-2 cells by comparing the standard parameter set with sets in which one of the six parameters u1, u2, M, a1/r, a2/r, and d/r is enhanced by 50%. For each parameter set, we performed >100,000 runs and calculated the conditional mean number of type-2 cells. This number increases with the enhancement of each parameter except the growth rate of type-1 cells, a1/r; interestingly, the latter enhancement reduces the cell number while it increases the probability of having at least one type-2 cell. This effect emerges because the total population reaches size M before type-2 cells gain a significant frequency if the growth rate of type-1 cells is large. Therefore, the consequence of a large growth rate of type-1 cells is a high probability of producing type-2 cells, but a small number of such cells that may be difficult to observe. In contrast, a higher relative death rate ( d/r) increases the number of type-2 cells because in that case, it takes longer for the total population to reach M and type-2 cells are likely to increase during that time. The most effective parameter to influence the expected number of type-2 cells is their growth rate; this parameter, however, does not affect the probability of having type-2 cells.
|
|
ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
>DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
|
We have presented two approaches to calculating the probability of having two mutations once the total population reaches a certain size. One approach is based on a multistate branching process. This methodology can be used to derive an analytic expression for the probability of two mutations as well as the probability distribution of cells. It is very accurate for mutations that confer a fitness disadvantage to the cell or that are neutral as compared to wild-type cells. The second approach requires some numerical calculation, but is very accurate when the mutations confer a fitness advantage to the cell and when they are neutral. To provide mathematical solutions for all scenarios, we present both approaches in this article.
An investigation of the probability of two mutations informs us about the importance of particular parameter values in the process. The relative growth rate of cells harboring one mutation (type-1 cells) is decisive for the probability of eventually producing two mutations. This feature suggests experimentally determining the growth rates of type-0 cells (which carry no mutation) and type-1 cells to predict the presence of two mutations. If the ratio of the growth rate of type-1 cells to the growth rate of type-0 cells is high, then the probability of two mutations is large. Therefore, the abundance of type-1 cells is a good proxy for the presence of type-2 cells (which harbor both mutations). Furthermore, large death rates increase the chance of accumulating mutations because the risk increases with the number of cell divisions generating the cell population; a population of a particular size will contain many more mutants if the cell turnover is large. Hence tumors with high apoptosis rates are at particular risk of containing resistant cells. Last, the mutation rates themselves increase the probability of mutations, and hence therapies that induce genetic instabilities or work by damaging DNA enhance the chance of treatment failure.
We have also investigated the probability distribution of the number of type-2 cells. The parameter that most effectively influences the number of those cells is their relative growth rate, which in turn does not affect the probability of having any type-2 cells. Interestingly, high relative growth rates of type-1 cells increase the probability that type-2 cells exist, but reduce their number. On the basis of our theory, the worst case is represented by a large relative growth rate of type-1 cells (which increases the probability that a type-2 cell emerges) and an even larger relative growth rate of type-2 cells (which ensures that such cells can grow). A situation requiring particular attention occurs when the growth rate of type-1 cells is larger than the growth rates of both type-0 and type-2 cells, because then a small number of type-2 cells exist with high probability, but those cells will be difficult to detect.
So far, we have assumed that the mutation rates are constant throughout tumor growth. However, genomic instabilities lead to increasing rates of genetic changes and are a frequent property of tumors (LENGAUER et al. 1998). Figure 6 demonstrates how increasing mutation rates influence the evolutionary dynamics of two mutations. As compared to constant mutation rates, continuously increasing rates lead to elevated probabilities of harboring two mutations. However, the mean number of cells with two mutations decreases in such scenarios (Table 4). This effect emerges because large mutation rates enhance the production of cells carrying two mutations, particularly when the population size is large, and therefore lead to more patients harboring fewer such cells. Our finding emphasizes the danger of genetically unstable lesions for treatment outcomes, as well as the necessity to use anticancer drugs that do not increase genomic mutation rates.
|
|
This article increases our knowledge of the evolutionary dynamics of an exponentially expanding population. An important goal of the field is to generalize our algorithm to arbitrary mutation–selection networks such that the probability of having n mutations (emerging in a particular order) in a growing population can be calculated and the expected number of cells harboring these mutations can be predicted. Further, the calculation may be adapted to describe situations in which more than one offspring arises per division event; such scenarios arise in infectious diseases such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). HAENO and IWASA (2007) consider the risk of drug resistance of an exponentially growing virus, assuming that infected cells give rise to a random number of virus particles per time interval. They derive a formula for the probability of one mutation at detection and show its implications for HIV primary infection. Our formulation of the probability of two mutations with regard to (cancer) cell division inspires an approach to calculate the probability of two mutations with regard to virus proliferation.
ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
>APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
the generating function for a lineage starting from a single type-1 cell and by
the generating function for a lineage starting from a single type-2 cell. Their equations satisfy the recursive formulas
![]() | (A1a) |
![]() | (A1b) |
and
.
Let
be the probability that there is one type-1 cell and no type-2 cell at time t. Similarly, let
be the probability that there is no type-1 cell and one type-2 cell at time t. Then system (A1) becomes
![]() | (A2a) |
![]() | (A2b) |
and
. As Equation A2a does not have an explicit solution, we adopt the following approximation. Suppose we have a solution of
for
. We convert this solution to a function
of x by assuming deterministic exponential growth of type-0 cells,
. Hence we have
![]() | (A3) |
![]() | (A4) |
![]() | (A5) |
. If we neglect the second term, which is of the order of u2, this equation is similar to a logistic equation and has two equilibria:
and
. Starting from
, the solution stays in the unstable equilibrium
. Now note that the second term of Equation A5 is negative because g(0) = 1 and h(0) = 0. For small t, this term is approximately
and pushes the system away from the unstable equilibrium
. Once the system is perturbed, it converges to the other equilibrium at
following the dynamics determined by the first term. The second term is therefore important only for small t, and we can approximate Equation A5 as
![]() | (A6) |
and
, we have
![]() | (A7) |
is a small quantity and
is a very large quantity, Equation A7 becomes
![]() | (A8) |
, we have
![]() | (A9) |
, we can further simplify the formula as follows:
![]() | (A10) |
ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
>APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
, the nonextinction probability. Hence we have
. With
(IWASA et al. 2006) and
, we obtain Equation 6 in the text.
Next we consider the probability that a type-2 cell is created within a lineage that starts from one type-1 cell. Let y be the number of type-1 cells present when the total cell population reaches size M, and let N be the mean number of type-1 cell division events that occur while type-1 cells increase from 1 cell to y cells. The per capita rate of increase in their number is given by
, and the per capita rate of cell division is given by a1. Hence we have
. With y >> 1, this expression becomes
![]() | (B1) |
with
. Note that
is the length of time between the emergence of a successful type-1 cell and when the total number of type-0 and type-1 cells reaches M. If
, we have
![]() | (B2) |
is the number of type-0 cells,
is the number of type-1 cells, and their sum equals M. Equation B2 is a transcendental equation and has to be solved numerically to obtain
.
With these results, the probability that there is at least one type-2 cell when the total population size reaches M is given by Equation 8 in the text. This expression holds if the death rates of type-2 cells can be neglected as compared to their growth rates. If the mortality of type-2 cells cannot be neglected, we replace Qx by the formula in IWASA et al. (2006) and obtain
![]() | (B3) |
and
. ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
>APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
. We first take the derivative of the differential equations for the generating functions, Equation A1, with respect to s2. Then we obtain a pair of linear equations, which leads to the solution given by Equation 11 in the text.
After having discussed the neutral case in the main text, we focus here on nonneutral cases. From Equation 11 and with
, we have
![]() | (C1) |
and
. Hence the expected number of type-2 cells once the total population reaches size M is
![]() | (C2) |
![]() | (C3) |
ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
>APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
. Now we consider the probability that the number of type-2 cells is less than a given value once the total population size reaches M. Let Z be the number of type-2 cells, and let
be the time it takes from the appearance of the first type-2 cell until the final size is reached (Figure 4). From the assumption that type-2 cells grow exponentially, we have
. Then the probability that the number of type-2 cells, Z, is less than
with
is given by
![]() | (D1) |
, and this expression approximately represents the length of time between the emergence of a type-1 cell from x type-0 cells and when the final population size is reached. Then the probability that the number of type-2 cells, Z, is less than
is expressed as the probability that no type-2 cell lineage emerges during
and that a type-2 cell lineage appears thereafter. Let S be the probability that a type-2 cell lineage appears during
. The probability, Qx, that a type-2 cell lineage appears during
has already been derived. Therefore, the probability that no type-2 cell lineage emerges during
and that a type-2 cell lineage appears thereafter is expressed as
. Considering that the population starts from one type-0 cell and excluding the cases in which no type-2 cells emerge, we have
![]() | (D2) |
, the cases where
must be considered. When
, the number of the type-2 cells is always less than
. Hence S is given by
![]() | (D3) |
Finally, let us discuss the probability distribution of the number of type-2 cells. According to Equation D2, the probability that the number of type-2 cells is between z1 and z2 with
is given by
![]() | (D4) |
![]() | (D5) |
In Figure 5, the dots represent the results of the computer simulation, system 1. We record the number of type-2 cells once the total population size (including type-2 cells) reaches M and calculate the distribution frequency. We perform >40,000 runs of this process to generate each figure.
ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
>ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LITERATURE CITED
ABSTRACT
THE MODEL
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX B: DERIVATION OF...
APPENDIX C: BRANCHING-PROCESS...
APPENDIX D: ALTERNATIVE FORMULA...
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
>LITERATURE CITED
ARMITAGE, P., and R. DOLL, 1954 The age distribution of cancer and a multi-stage theory of carcinogenesis. Br. J. Cancer 8: 1–12.[Medline]
ARMITAGE, P., and R. DOLL, 1957 A two-stage theory of carcinogenesis in relation to the age distribution of human cancer. Br. J. Cancer 11: 161–169.[Medline]
CHAMBERS, A., A. GROOM and I. MACDONALD, 2002 Dissemination and growth of cancer cells in metastatic sites. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2: 563–572.[CrossRef][Medline]
FISHER, J. C., 1959 Multiple-mutation theory of carcinogenesis. Nature 181: 651–652.
FRANK, S. A., 2003 Somatic mosaicism and cancer: inference based on a conditional Luria-Delbrueck distribution. J. Theor. Biol. 223: 405–412.[CrossRef][Medline]
FRIEND, S. H., R. BERNARDS, S. ROGELI, R. A. WEINBERG, J. M. RAPAPORT et al., 1986 A human DNA segment with properties of the gene that predisposes to retinoblastoma and osteosarcoma. Nature 323: 643–646.[CrossRef][Medline]
GOLDIE, J. H., and A. J. COLDMAN, 1979 A mathematical model for relating the drug sensitivity of tumors to their spontaneous mutation rate. Cancer Treat. Rep. 63: 1727–1733.[Medline]
GOTTESMAN, M. M., 2002 Mechanisms of cancer drug resistance. Annu. Rev. Med. 53: 615–627.[CrossRef][Medline]
HAENO, H., and Y. IWASA, 2007 Probability of resistance evolution for exponentially growing virus in the host. J. Theor. Biol. 246: 323–331.[CrossRef][Medline]
HOLYOAKE, T. L., X. JIANG, M. W. DRUMMOND, A. C. EAVES and C. J. EAVES, 2002 Elucidating critical mechanisms of deregulated stem cell turnover in the chronic phase of chronic myeloid leukemia. Leukemia 16: 549–558.[CrossRef][Medline]
IWASA, Y., M. A. NOWAK and F. MICHOR, 2006 Evolution of resistance during clonal expansion. Genetics 172: 2557–2566.
KNUDSON, A. G., 1971 Mutation and cancer: statistical study of retinoblastoma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 68: 820–823.
LENGAUER, C., K. W. KINZLER and B. VOGELSTEIN, 1998 Genetic instabilities of human cancers. Nature 396: 623–649.[CrossRef][Medline]
LOWE, S. W., S. BODIS, A. MCCLATCHEY, L. REMINGTON, H. E. RULEY et al., 1994 p53 status and the efficacy of cancer therapy in vivo. Science 266: 807–810.
LUEBECK, E. G., and S. H. MOOLGAVKAR, 2002 Multistage carcinogenesis and the incidence of colorectal cancer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99: 15095–15100.
LURIA, S. E., and M. DELBRÜCK, 1943 Mutations of bacteria from virus sensitivity to virus resistance. Genetics 28: 491–511.
MICHOR, F., and Y. IWASA, 2006 Dynamics of metastasis suppressor gene inactivation. J. Theor. Biol. 241: 676–689.[CrossRef][Medline]
MICHOR, F., Y. IWASA and M. A. NOWAK, 2004 Dynamics of cancer progression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 4: 197–205.[CrossRef][Medline]
MICHOR, F., T. P. HUGHES, Y. IWASA, S. BRANFORD, N. P. SHAH et al., 2005 Dynamics of chronic myeloid leukemia. Nature 435: 1267–1270.[CrossRef][Medline]
MOOLGAVKAR, S. H., and A. G. KNUDSON, 1981 Mutation and cancer: a model for human carcinogenesis. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 66: 1037–1052.[Medline]
NORDLING, C. O., 1953 A new theory on cancer-inducing mechanism. Br. J. Cancer 7: 68–72.[Medline]
POZZATTI, R., R. MUSCHEL, J. WILLIAMS, R. PADMANABHAN, B. HOWARD et al., 1986 Primary rat embryo cells transformed by one or two oncogenes show different metastatic potentials. Science 232: 223–227.
SHAH, N. P., C. TRAN, F. Y. LEE, P. CHEN, D. NORRIS et al., 2004 Overriding imatinib resistance with a novel ABL kinase inhibitor. Science 305: 399–401.
SHAH, N. P., B. J. SKAGGS, S. BRANFORD, T. P. HUGHES, J. M. NICOLL et al., 2007 Sequential ABL kinase inhibitor therapy selects for compound drug-resistant BCR-ABL mutations with altered oncogenic potency. J. Clin. Invest. 117: 2562–2569.[CrossRef][Medline]
STEEG, P. S., 2004 Metastasis suppressor genes. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 96: E4.
STEEG, P. S., G. BEVILACQUA, L. KOPPER, U. P. THORGEIRSSON, J. E. TALMADGE et al., 1988 Evidence for a novel gene associated with low tumor metastatic potential. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 80: 200–204.
TOKARSKI, J. S., J. A. NEWITT, C. Y. CHANG, J. D. CHENG, M. WITTEKIND et al., 2006 The structure of dasatiuib (BMS-354825) bound to activated ABL kinase domain elucidates its inhibitory activity against imatinib-resistant ABL mutants. Cancer Res. 66: 5790–5797.
TLSTY, T. D., B. H. MARGOLIN and K. LUM, 1989 Difference in the rates of gene amplification in nontumorigenic and tumorigenic cell-lines as measure by Luria-Delbrück fluctuation analysis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86: 9441–9445.
VOLM, M., and G. STAMMLER, 1996 Retinoblastoma (rb) protein expression and resistance in squamous cell lung carcinomas. Anticancer Res. 16: 891–894.[Medline]
WESTPHAL, C. H., S. ROWAN, C. SCHMALTZ, A. ELSON, D. E. FISHER et al., 1997 ATM and p53 cooperate in apoptosis and suppression of tumorigenesis, but not in resistance to acute radiation toxicity. Nat. Genet. 16: 397–401.[CrossRef][Medline]
WODARZ, D., and N. L. KOMAROVA, 2005 Computational Biology of Cancer: Lecture Notes and Mathematical Modeling. World Scientific Publishing, Hackensack, NJ.
WYLLIE, A. H., K. A. ROSE, C. M. STEEL, R. G. M. FOSTER and D. A. SPANDIDOS, 1987 Rodent fibroblast tumors expressing human myc and ras genes: growth, metastasis and endogenous oncogene expression. Br. J. Cancer 56: 251–259.[Medline]
VOGELSTEIN, B., and K. W. KINZLER, 2002 The Genetic Basis of Human Cancer. McGraw-Hill, New York.
ZHENG, Q., 1999 Progress of a half century in the study of the Luria-Delbrück distribution. Math. Biosci. 162: 1–32.[CrossRef][Medline]
Communicating editor: P. J. OEFNER
- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Haeno, H.
- Articles by Michor, F.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Haeno, H.
- Articles by Michor, F.










and (a)
,
, and
; (b)
, and 




,
(line 1), and
(line 2); (b)
(line 1), and
,
,
(line 1), and 






,
, and
, respectively, which appear as three lines with different slopes. A mutation is created at a Poisson rate, as indicated by the two arrows. It takes 
, the probability that Z is equal to z. Parameter values are
,
, and
and (a)
, (b)
.
each 1000 times type-0 cells and type-1 cells divide, respectively. We show that the probability of two mutations increases with the value of
,
(line 1),
(line 2),
(line 3), and
(line 4).





















