Human tumor xenograft studies are the primary means to evaluate the biological activity of anticancer agents in late-stage preclinical drug discovery. The variability in the growth rate of human tumors established in mice and the small sample sizes make rigorous statistical analysis critical. The most commonly used summary of antitumor activity for these studies is the T/C ratio. However, alternative methods based on growth rate modeling can be used. Here, we describe a summary metric called the rate-based T/C, derived by fitting each animal's tumor growth to a simple exponential model. The rate-based T/C uses all of the data, in contrast with the traditional T/C, which only uses a single measurement. We compare the rate-based T/C with the traditional T/C and assess their performance through a bootstrap analysis of 219 tumor xenograft studies. We find that the rate-based T/C requires fewer animals to achieve the same power as the traditional T/C. We also compare 14-day studies with 21-day studies and find that 14-day studies are more cost efficient. Finally, we perform a power analysis to determine an appropriate sample size.

The spike protein receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 is the molecular target for many vaccines and antibody-based prophylactics aimed at bringing COVID-19 under control. Such a narrow molecular focus raises the specter of viral immune evasion as a potential failure mode for these biomedical interventions. With the emergence of new strains of SARS-CoV-2 with altered transmissibility and immune evasion potential, a critical question is this: how easily can the virus escape neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) targeting the spike RBD? To answer this question, we combined an analysis of the RBD structure-function with an evolutionary modeling framework. Our structure-function analysis revealed that epitopes for RBD-targeting nAbs overlap one another substantially and can be evaded by escape mutants with ACE2 affinities comparable to the wild type, that are observed in sequence surveillance data and infect cells in vitro. This suggests that the fitness cost of nAb-evading mutations is low. We then used evolutionary modeling to predict the frequency of immune escape before and after the widespread presence of nAbs due to vaccines, passive immunization or natural immunity. Our modeling suggests that SARS-CoV-2 mutants with one or two mildly deleterious mutations are expected to exist in high numbers due to neutral genetic variation, and consequently resistance to vaccines or other prophylactics that rely on one or two antibodies for protection can develop quickly -and repeatedly- under positive selection. Predicted resistance timelines are comparable to those of the decay kinetics of nAbs raised against vaccinal or natural antigens, raising a second potential mechanism for loss of immunity in the population. Strategies for viral elimination should therefore be diversified across molecular targets and therapeutic modalities.

The rapid emergence and expansion of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants threatens our ability to achieve herd immunity for COVID-19. These novel SARS-CoV-2 variants often harbor multiple point mutations, conferring one or more evolutionarily advantageous traits, such as increased transmissibility, immune evasion and longer infection duration. In a number of cases, variant emergence has been linked to long-term infections in individuals who were either immunocompromised or treated with convalescent plasma. In this paper, we used a stochastic evolutionary modeling framework to explore the emergence of fitter variants of SARS-CoV-2 during long-term infections. We found that increased viral load and infection duration favor emergence of such variants. While the overall probability of emergence and subsequent transmission from any given infection is low, on a population level these events occur fairly frequently. Targeting these low-probability stochastic events that lead to the establishment of novel advantageous viral variants might allow us to slow the rate at which they emerge in the patient population, and prevent them from spreading deterministically due to natural selection. Our work thus suggests practical ways to achieve control of long-term SARS-CoV-2 infections, which will be critical for slowing the rate of viral evolution.

Purpose: Recommended phase II dose (RP2D) determination for combination therapy regimens is a constrained optimization problem of maximizing antitumor activity within the constraint of clinical tolerability to provide a wide therapeutic index. A methodology for addressing this problem was developed and tested using clinical and preclinical data from combinations of the investigational drugs TAK-117, a PI3Kα inhibitor, and TAK-228, a TORC1/2 dual inhibitor. Experimental Design: Utilizing free fraction-corrected average concentrations, C_{117}^{avg}\ and C_{228}^{avg}, which are the primary pharmacokinetic predictors of single-agent preclinical antitumor activity, a preclinical exposure-efficacy surface was characterized, allowing for nonlinear interactions between growth rate inhibition of the agents on a MDA-MB-361 cell line xenograft model. Logistic regression was used to generate an exposure-effect surface for C_{117}^{avg}\ and C_{228}^{avg} versus clinical toxicity outcomes [experiencing a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT)] in single-agent and combination dose-escalation studies. A maximum tolerated exposure curve was defined at which DLT probability was 25%; predicted antitumor activity along this curve was used to determine optimal RP2D. Results: The toxicity constraint curve determined from early clinical data predicted that any clinically tolerable combination was unlikely to result in greater antitumor activity than either single-agent TAK-117 or TAK-228 administered at their respective MTDs. Similar results were obtained with 10 other cell lines, with one agent or the other predicted to outperform the combination. Conclusions: This methodology represents a general, principled way of evaluating and selecting optimal RP2D combinations in oncology. The methodology will be retested upon availability of clinical data from TAK-117/TAK-228 combination phase II studies. See related commentary by Mayawala et al., p. 6564

Background: The word ‘pandemic’ conjures dystopian images of bodies stacked in the streets and societies on the brink of collapse. Despite this frightening picture, denialism and noncompliance with public health measures are common in the historical record, for example during the 1918 Influenza pandemic or the 2015 Ebola epidemic. The unique characteristics of SARS-CoV-2—its high basic reproduction number (R₀), time-limited natural immunity and considerable potential for asymptomatic spread—exacerbate the public health repercussions of noncompliance with interventions (such as vaccines and masks) to limit disease transmission. Our work explores the rationality and impact of noncompliance with measures aimed at limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2.Methods: In this work, we used game theory to explore when noncompliance confers a perceived benefit to individuals. We then used epidemiological modeling to predict the impact of noncompliance on control of SARS-CoV-2, demonstrating that the presence of a noncompliant subpopulation prevents suppression of disease spread.Results: Our modeling demonstrates that noncompliance is a Nash equilibrium under a broad set of conditions and that the existence of a noncompliant population can result in extensive endemic disease in the long-term after a return to pre-pandemic social and economic activity. Endemic disease poses a threat for both compliant and noncompliant individuals; all community members are protected if complete suppression is achieved, which is only possible with a high degree of compliance. For interventions that are highly effective at preventing disease spread, however, the consequences of noncompliance are borne disproportionately by noncompliant individuals.Conclusions: In sum, our work demonstrates the limits of free-market approaches to compliance with disease control measures during a pandemic. The act of noncompliance with disease intervention measures creates a negative externality, rendering suppression of SARS-CoV-2 spread ineffective. Our work underscores the importance of developing effective strategies for prophylaxis through public health measures aimed at complete suppression and the need to focus on compliance at a population level.

The rapid emergence of immune-evading viral variants of SARS-CoV-2 calls into question the practicality of a vaccine-only public-health strategy for managing the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. It has been suggested that widespread vaccination is necessary to prevent the emergence of future immune-evading mutants. Here, we examined that proposition using stochastic computational models of viral transmission and mutation. Specifically, we looked at the likelihood of emergence of immune escape variants requiring multiple mutations and the impact of vaccination on this process. Our results suggest that the transmission rate of intermediate SARS-CoV-2 mutants will impact the rate at which novel immune-evading variants appear. While vaccination can lower the rate at which new variants appear, other interventions that reduce transmission can also have the same effect. Crucially, relying solely on widespread and repeated vaccination (vaccinating the entire population multiple times a year) is not sufficient to prevent the emergence of novel immune-evading strains, if transmission rates remain high within the population. Thus, vaccines alone are incapable of slowing the pace of evolution of immune evasion, and vaccinal protection against severe and fatal outcomes for COVID-19 patients is therefore not assured.