Whether the nom de guerre is Mathematical Oncology, Computational or Systems Biology, Theoretical Biology, Evolutionary Oncology, Bioinformatics, or simply Basic Science, there is no denying that mathematics continues to play an increasingly prominent role in cancer research. Mathematical Oncology—defined here simply as the use of mathematics in cancer research—complements and overlaps with a number of other fields that rely on mathematics as a core methodology. As a result, Mathematical Oncology has a broad scope, ranging from theoretical studies to clinical trials designed with mathematical models. This Roadmap differentiates Mathematical Oncology from related fields and demonstrates specific areas of focus within this unique field of research. The dominant theme of this Roadmap is the personalization of medicine through mathematics, modelling, and simulation. This is achieved through the use of patient-specific clinical data to: develop individualized screening strategies to detect cancer earlier; make predictions of response to therapy; design adaptive, patient-specific treatment plans to overcome therapy resistance; and establish domain-specific standards to share model predictions and to make models and simulations reproducible. The cover art for this Roadmap was chosen as an apt metaphor for the beautiful, strange, and evolving relationship between mathematics and cancer.

Noninvasive imaging technologies can help create patient-specific mathematical models to predict tumor growth.

Introduction: A defining hallmark of cancer is aberrant cell proliferation. Efforts to understand the generative properties of cancer cells span all biological scales: from genetic deviations and alterations of metabolic pathways, to physical stresses due to overcrowding, as well as the effects of therapeutics and the immune system. While these factors have long been studied in the laboratory, mathematical and computational techniques are being increasingly applied to help understand and forecast tumor growth and treatment response. Advantages of mathematical modeling of proliferation include the ability to simulate and predict the spatiotemporal development of tumors across multiple experimental scales. Central to proliferation modeling is the incorporation of available biological data and validation with experimental data. Areas covered: We present an overview of past and current mathematical strategies directed at understanding tumor cell proliferation. We identify areas for mathematical development as motivated by available experimental and clinical evidence, with a particular emphasis on emerging, non-invasive imaging technologies. Expert commentary: The data required to legitimize mathematical models are often difficult or (currently) impossible to obtain. We suggest areas for further investigation to establish mathematical models that more effectively utilize available data to make informed predictions on tumor cell proliferation.

Digital twins employ mathematical and computational models to virtually represent a physical object (e.g., planes and human organs), predict the behavior of the object, and enable decision-making to optimize the future behavior of the object. While digital twins have been widely used in engineering for decades, their applications to oncology are only just emerging. Due to advances in experimental techniques quantitatively characterizing cancer, as well as advances in the mathematical and computational sciences, the notion of building and applying digital twins to understand tumor dynamics and personalize the care of cancer patients has been increasingly appreciated. In this review, we present the opportunities and challenges of applying digital twins in clinical oncology, with a particular focus on integrating medical imaging with mechanism-based, tissue-scale mathematical modeling. Specifically, we first introduce the general digital twin framework and then illustrate existing applications of image-guided digital twins in healthcare. Next, we detail both the imaging and modeling techniques that provide practical opportunities to build patient-specific digital twins for oncology. We then describe the current challenges and limitations in developing image-guided, mechanism-based digital twins for oncology along with potential solutions. We conclude by outlining five fundamental questions that can serve as a roadmap when designing and building a practical digital twin for oncology and attempt to provide answers for a specific application to brain cancer. We hope that this contribution provides motivation for the imaging science, oncology, and computational communities to develop practical digital twin technologies to improve the care of patients battling cancer.

We develop a methodology to create data-driven predictive digital twins for optimal risk-aware clinical decision-making. We illustrate the methodology as an enabler for an anticipatory personalized treatment that accounts for uncertainties in the underlying tumor biology in high-grade gliomas, where heterogeneity in the response to standard-of-care (SOC) radiotherapy contributes to sub-optimal patient outcomes. The digital twin is initialized through prior distributions derived from population-level clinical data in the literature for a mechanistic model's parameters. Then the digital twin is personalized using Bayesian model calibration for assimilating patient-specific magnetic resonance imaging data. The calibrated digital twin is used to propose optimal radiotherapy treatment regimens by solving a multi-objective risk-based optimization under uncertainty problem. The solution leads to a suite of patient-specific optimal radiotherapy treatment regimens exhibiting varying levels of trade-off between the two competing clinical objectives: (i) maximizing tumor control (characterized by minimizing the risk of tumor volume growth) and (ii) minimizing the toxicity from radiotherapy. The proposed digital twin framework is illustrated by generating an in silico cohort of 100 patients with high-grade glioma growth and response properties typically observed in the literature. For the same total radiation dose as the SOC, the personalized treatment regimens lead to median increase in tumor time to progression of around six days. Alternatively, for the same level of tumor control as the SOC, the digital twin provides optimal treatment options that lead to a median reduction in radiation dose by 16.7% (10 Gy) compared to SOC total dose of 60 Gy. The range of optimal solutions also provide options with increased doses for patients with aggressive cancer, where SOC does not lead to sufficient tumor control.