4.6 Article

Spatio temporal dynamics of direct current in treated anisotropic tumors

期刊

MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTERS IN SIMULATION
卷 203, 期 -, 页码 609-632

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.matcom.2022.07.004

关键词

Modified Gompertz equation; Anisotropic and heterogeneous malignant solid tumors; Electrochemical therapy; Diffusion tensor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By extending the Gompertz equation, this study simulated the spatiotemporal behavior of anisotropic tumors and conducted a theoretical analysis. The results showed that direct current treatment is most effective for highly heterogeneous, anisotropic, aggressive, and hypodense malignant solid tumors.
The inclusion of a diffusion term in the modified Gompertz equation (Cabrales et al., 2018) allows to describe the spatiotemporal growth of direct current treated tumors. The aim of this study is to extend the previous model to the case of anisotropic tumors, simulating the spatiotemporal behavior of direct current treated anisotropic tumors, also carrying out a theoretical analysis of the proposed model. Growths in the mass, volume and density of the solid tumors are shown for each response type after direct current application (disease progression, partial response, stationary partial response and complete remission). For this purpose, the Method of Lines and different diffusion tensors are used. The results show that the growth of the tumor treated with direct current is faster for the shorter duration of the net antitumor effect and the higher diffusion coefficient and anisotropy degree of the solid tumor. It is concluded that the greatest direct current antitumor effectiveness occurs for the highly heterogeneous, anisotropic, aggressive and hypodense malignant solid tumors. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of International Association for Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (IMACS). This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据