Deep reinforcement learning-based control of multi-drug cancer models


Abstract

Cancer remains a critical threat to human life and health, with the emergence of drug resistance standing as the greatest challenge in cancer treatment. To mitigate the adverse impacts of cancer drug resistance, current research efforts have focused on the development of single-drug and multi-drug models, as well as the formulation of corresponding therapeutic strategies. Owing to the relative simplicity of the single-drug framework, the development of models and the optimization of treatment strategies under this framework have reached a mature stage. In contrast, the multi-drug framework, characterized by its inherent complexity, still lacks fully developed models and optimized strategies. In this study, we established a dual-drug cancer treatment model and employed deep reinforcement learning algorithms, widely studied and applied in the single-drug framework, for control optimization. Additionally, we analyzed the effects of complex environmental factors, such as discrete drug dosing, drug synergism, and unidirectional collateral sensitivity, on the optimization of cancer treatment strategies. The results demonstrated that deep reinforcement learning algorithms still yield excellent optimization outcomes under the dual-drug framework. We found that complex environmental factors in the multi-drug framework exert varying degrees of influence on all cancer treatment optimization strategies. In future work, it is necessary to identify and screen out the complex environmental factors with the greatest impact and formulate specific optimization strategies to delay the emergence of drug resistance to the maximum extent.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].