Abstract
One intrinsic characteristic of Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) is its high plasticity, resulting in heterogeneous cancer cell subpopulations with distinct interactions with the immune system. To address TNBC plasticity, we set to model the dynamics of tumor cell subpopulations derived from the murine TNBC-like 4T1 cell line, by developing a system of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) based on experimental results, distinguishing between Sca1⁺ (Stem Cell Antigen 1) and Sca1⁻ cells and identifying chemotherapy-resistant populations. The model incorporates interactions with immune cells, including natural killer (NK) cells, T lymphocytes, and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs). We investigated the effects of chemotherapy and anti-MDSC immune-boosting agent—methotrexate (MTX) and Abequolixron, respectively—through various treatment regimens and combinations. Simulations were conducted to explore different treatment initiation times and variations in immune cell killing rates. Our findings suggest treatment timing and administration order as key determinants of therapeutic outcome. Initiating chemotherapy in synchrony with immune-killer cell oscillations—near their local peak—promoted tumor elimination, whereas mistimed treatment led to tumor escape. An optimal chemotherapy exposure window was required for elimination; exposures that were too short or prolonged favored escape of MTX-sensitive and MTX-resistant cells, respectively. Longer MTX-free intervals shifted tumors from dormancy toward elimination, suggesting reduced recurrence risk. Administering immune-boosting therapy before chemotherapy broadened the effective therapeutic window, and combination treatment with Abequolixron and MTX further improved outcomes. These results provide, for the first time a quantitative mathematical framework based on experimental data, leveraging TNBC cell plasticity for optimizing combined chemo-immunotherapy scheduling in TNBC.
Code availability
The code used in this study is openly available on Zenodo at: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15723767. The corresponding GitHub repository can be accessed at: https://github.com/Mobina-Daneshparvar/cancer-immune-dynamics.
References
Aysola, K. et al. Triple negative breast cancer–an overview. Hereditary Genet. 2013(Suppl 2), 001 (2013).
Ma, T. et al. Predictive markers of rapid disease progression and chemotherapy resistance in triple-negative breast cancer patients following postoperative adjuvant therapy. Sci. Rep. 15(1), 386 (2025).
Won, K.-A. & Spruck, C. Triple-negative breast cancer therapy: Current and future perspectives. Int. J. Oncol. 57(6), 1245–61 (2020).
Guo, Z. & Han, S. Targeting cancer stem cell plasticity in triple-negative breast cancer. Explor. Target. Antitumor Ther. 4(6), 1165 (2023).
Peyvandi, S., Bulliard, M., Yilmaz, A., Kauzlaric, A., Marcone, R., Haerri, L., et al. Tumor-educated Gr1 + CD11b+ cells drive breast cancer metastasis via OSM/IL-6/JAK–induced cancer cell plasticity. J. Clin. Invest. 134(6) (2024).
Upadhyay, G. et al. Stem cell antigen-1 enhances tumorigenicity by disruption of growth differentiation factor-10 (GDF10)–dependent TGF-β signaling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 108(19), 7820–7825 (2011).
Velasco-Velázquez, M. A., Popov, V. M., Lisanti, M. P. & Pestell, R. G. The role of breast cancer stem cells in metastasis and therapeutic implications. Am. J. Pathol. 179(1), 2–11 (2011).
Mukherjee, A. G. et al. Role of immune cells and receptors in cancer treatment: an immunotherapeutic approach. Vaccines 10(9), 1493 (2022).
Shaver, K. A., Croom-Perez, T. J. & Copik, A. J. Natural killer cells: The linchpin for successful cancer immunotherapy. Front. Immunol. 12, 679117 (2021).
Vojdani, A. et al. Natural killer cells and cytotoxic T cells: Complementary partners against microorganisms and cancer. Microorganisms 12(1), 230 (2024).
Spranger, S. & Gajewski, T. F. Mechanisms of tumor cell–intrinsic immune evasion. Annu. Rev. Cancer Biol. 2(1), 213–228 (2018).
Haist, M., Stege, H., Grabbe, S. & Bros, M. The functional crosstalk between myeloid-derived suppressor cells and regulatory T cells within the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Cancers 13(2), 210 (2021).
Sordo-Bahamonde, C. et al. Chemo-immunotherapy: A new trend in cancer treatment. Cancers 15(11), 2912 (2023).
Xiong, N., Wu, H. & Yu, Z. Advancements and challenges in triple-negative breast cancer: A comprehensive review of therapeutic and diagnostic strategies. Front. Oncol. 14, 1405491 (2024).
Huennekens, F. The methotrexate story: A paradigm for development of cancer chemotherapeutic agents. Adv. Enzyme Regul. 34, 397–419 (1994).
Colleoni, M. et al. Classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil chemotherapy is more effective in triple-negative, node-negative breast cancer: Results from two randomized trials of adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for node-negative breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 28(18), 2966–73 (2010).
Munzone, E., Curigliano, G., Burstein, H., Winer, E. & Goldhirsch, A. CMF revisited in the 21st century. Ann. Oncol. 23(2), 305–311 (2012).
Bocci, G., et al. Cyclophosphamide-methotrexate ‘metronomic’chemotherapy for the palliative treatment of metastatic breast cancer. A comparative pharmacoeconomic evaluation. Annals Oncol. 16(8), 1243–1252 (2005).
Colleoni, M. et al. Low-dose oral methotrexate and cyclophosphamide in metastatic breast cancer: Antitumor activity and correlation with vascular endothelial growth factor levels. Ann. Oncol. 13(1), 73–80 (2002).
Lora, M. et al. Low dose methotrexate has divergent effects on cycling and resting human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells. Clin. Transl. Sci. 18(5), e70233. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.70233 (2025).
Pannacciulli, I., Massa, G., Bogliolo, G., Ghio, R. & Sobrero, A. Effects of high-dose methotrexate and leucovorin on murine hemopoietic stem cells. Cancer Res. 42(2), 530–534 (1982).
Ling, S. P. et al. Role of immunotherapy in the treatment of cancer: A systematic review. Cancers 14(21), 5205 (2022).
Lim, E., et al. Abstract CT146: RGX-104, a first-in-class immunotherapy targeting the liver-X receptor (LXR): initial results from the phase 1b RGX-104 plus docetaxel combination dose escalation cohorts. Cancer Res. 80(16_Supplement), CT146-CT (2020).
Tavazoie, M. F. et al. LXR/ApoE activation restricts innate immune suppression in cancer. Cell 172(4), 825–40. e18 (2018).
Serrano García, L. et al. Patterns of immune evasion in triple-negative breast cancer and new potential therapeutic targets: a review. Front. Immunol. 15, 1513421 (2024).
Cha, Y. J. & Koo, J. S. Role of tumor-associated myeloid cells in breast cancer. Cells 9(8), 1785 (2020).
Nedeljković, M. & Damjanović, A. Mechanisms of chemotherapy resistance in triple-negative breast cancer—How we can rise to the challenge. Cells 8(9), 957 (2019).
Gatenby, R. A., Silva, A. S., Gillies, R. J. & Frieden, B. R. Adaptive therapy. Cancer Res. 69(11), 4894–903 (2009).
Gluzman, M., Scott, J. G. & Vladimirsky, A. Optimizing adaptive cancer therapy: Dynamic programming and evolutionary game theory. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 287(1925), 20192454 (2020).
Pandya, P. H., Murray, M. E., Pollok, K. E. & Renbarger, J. L. The immune system in cancer pathogenesis: Potential therapeutic approaches. J. Immunol. Res. 2016(1), 4273943 (2016).
Panetta, J. C. A mathematical model of drug resistance: Heterogeneous tumors. Math. Biosci. 147(1), 41–61 (1998).
Chisholm, R. H., Lorenzi, T. & Clairambault, J. Cell population heterogeneity and evolution towards drug resistance in cancer: Biological and mathematical assessment, theoretical treatment optimisation. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Gen. Subj. 1860(11), 2627–45 (2016).
Mehdizadeh, R., Shariatpanahi, S. P., Goliaei, B. & Rüegg, C. Targeting myeloid-derived suppressor cells in combination with tumor cell vaccination predicts anti-tumor immunity and breast cancer dormancy: An in silico experiment. Sci. Rep. 13(1), 5875 (2023).
Mehdizadeh, R., Shariatpanahi, S. P., Goliaei, B., Peyvandi, S. & Rüegg, C. Dormant tumor cell vaccination: A mathematical model of immunological dormancy in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancers 13(2), 245 (2021).
Mohammad Mirzaei, N. et al. A mathematical model of breast tumor progression based on immune infiltration. J. Pers. Med. 11(10), 1031 (2021).
Davenport, A. A. et al. Mathematical model of triple-negative breast cancer in response to combination chemotherapies. Bull. Math. Biol. 85(1), 7 (2023).
Shen, J., Li, L., Howlett, N. G., Cohen, P. S. & Sun, G. Application of a biphasic mathematical model of cancer cell drug response for formulating potent and synergistic targeted drug combinations to triple negative breast cancer cells. Cancers 12(5), 1087 (2020).
López-Alvarenga, J. C. et al. A mathematical model to optimize the neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment sequence for triple-negative locally advanced breast cancer. Mathematics 11(11), 2410 (2023).
Gonzalez, H., Hagerling, C. & Werb, Z. Roles of the immune system in cancer: From tumor initiation to metastatic progression. Genes Dev. 32(19–20), 1267–1284 (2018).
Speiser, D. E., Ho, P.-C. & Verdeil, G. Regulatory circuits of T cell function in cancer. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 16(10), 599–611 (2016).
Donadon, M. et al. Increased infiltration of natural killer and T cells in colorectal liver metastases improves patient overall survival. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 21(8), 1226–1236 (2017).
Ghanizadeh, M., Shariatpanahi, S. P., Goliaei, B. & Rüegg, C. Mathematical modeling approach of cancer immunoediting reveals new insights in targeted-therapy and timing plan of cancer treatment. Chaos Solitons Fractals 152, 111349 (2021).
He, D., Xu, W., Li, X. & Xu, J.-X. A prognostic immunotherapy model for 4T1 breast cancer with combined cyclophosphamide and TLR agonist. J. Biol. Syst. 28(01), 65–90 (2020).
Lobo, E. D. & Balthasar, J. P. Pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic modeling of methotrexate-induced toxicity in mice. J. Pharm. Sci. 92(8), 1654–64 (2003).
Rihan, F. A., Rahman, D. A., Lakshmanan, S. & Alkhajeh, A. A time delay model of tumour–immune system interactions: Global dynamics, parameter estimation, sensitivity analysis. Appl. Math. Comput. 232, 606–23 (2014).
Yamamoto, Y. et al. Tumour and immune cell dynamics explain the PSA bounce after prostate cancer brachytherapy. Br. J. Cancer 115(2), 195–202 (2016).
Coventry, B. J. et al. CRP identifies homeostatic immune oscillations in cancer patients: A potential treatment targeting tool?. J. Transl. Med. 7(1), 102 (2009).
Xiao, Z., Hao, Y., Qin, T. & Han, Z. Periodic oscillation of blood leukocytes, platelets, and hemoglobin in a patient with chronic eosinophilic leukemia. Leuk. Res. 27(1), 89–91 (2003).
Tubin, S., Ashdown, M. & Jeremic, B. Time-synchronized immune-guided SBRT partial bulky tumor irradiation targeting hypoxic segment while sparing the peritumoral immune microenvironment. Radiat. Oncol. 14(1), 220 (2019).
Croghan, A. & Markovic, S. N. Fluctuation of systemic immunity in melanoma and implications for timing of therapy Alexey A. Leontovich2, Roxana S. Dronca3, Vera J. Suman2, Martin L. Ashdown4, Wendy K. Nevala1, Michael A. Thompson1, Andrew Robinson5, Lisa A. Kottschade3, Judith S. Kaur3, Robert R. McWilliams3, Leonid V. Ivanov6, Gary. Front. Biosci. 4, 958–75 (2012).
Maeda, H. & Khatami, M. Analyses of repeated failures in cancer therapy for solid tumors: Poor tumor-selective drug delivery, low therapeutic efficacy and unsustainable costs. Clin. Transl. Med. 7, 1–20 (2018).
Arabameri, A. & Arab, S. Understanding the interplay of CAR-NK cells and triple-negative breast cancer: Insights from computational modeling. Bull. Math. Biol. 86(2), 20 (2024).
Fortin, B. M. et al. Circadian control of tumor immunosuppression affects efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade. Nat. Immunol. 25(7), 1257–1269 (2024).
El-Tanani, M. et al. Circadian rhythms and cancer: implications for timing in therapy. Discov. Oncol. 15(1), 767 (2024).
Zeng, Y., Guo, Z., Wu, M., Chen, F. & Chen, L. Circadian rhythm regulates the function of immune cells and participates in the development of tumors. Cell Death Discov. 10(1), 199 (2024).
Liao, D. Z. et al. Association of delayed time to treatment initiation with overall survival and recurrence among patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in an underserved urban population. JAMA Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 145(11), 1001–1009 (2019).
West, J. et al. Towards multidrug adaptive therapy. Cancer Res. 80(7), 1578–1589 (2020).
Gatenby, R. A. & Brown, J. S. Integrating evolutionary dynamics into cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 17(11), 675–686 (2020).
Petrelli, F. et al. Adjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 151, 251–259 (2015).
Lorigan, P. et al. Randomized phase III trial of dose-dense chemotherapy supported by whole-blood hematopoietic progenitors in better-prognosis small-cell lung cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 97(9), 666–674 (2005).
Kang, D.H. et al. The rest period between chemotherapy and immunotherapy influences the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in lung cancer. Thorac Cancer. 13(16), 2346–2354 (2022).
Peyvandi, S., Lan, Q., Lorusso, G. & Rüegg, C. Chemotherapy-induced immunological breast cancer dormancy: a new function for old drugs?. JCMT 5, N/A-N/A (2019).
Kwon, M., Jung, H., Nam, G.-H. & Kim, I.-S. The right timing, right combination, right sequence, and right delivery for cancer immunotherapy. JCR 331, 321–334 (2021).
Shariatpanahi, S. P., Shariatpanahi, S. P., Madjidzadeh, K., Hassan, M. & Abedi-Valugerdi, M. Mathematical modeling of tumor-induced immunosuppression by myeloid-derived suppressor cells: Implications for therapeutic targeting strategies. J Theor Biol 442, 1–10 (2018).
Lai, X. & Friedman, A. Combination therapy of cancer with cancer vaccine and immune checkpoint inhibitors: A mathematical model. PLoS One 12(5), e0178479 (2017).
Mokhtari, R. B. et al. Combination therapy in combating cancer. Oncotarget 8(23), 38022 (2017).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a grant from the Swiss National Science Foundation (310030_208136) to CR.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
M.D.: Conceptualization, simulation data collection, data analysis, and manuscript draft preparation. M.G.: Conceptualization, simulation data collection, and manuscript draft preparation and revision. S.P.S.: Project supervision, conceptualization, and manuscript revision. B.G.: Project administration and project supervision. R.M.: Manuscript revision. C.R.: Project supervision and manuscript revision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Daneshparvar, M., Ghanizadeh, M., Shariatpanahi, S.P. et al. Modeling optimal timing of immunotherapy and chemotherapy to prevent resistance and recurrence in triple-negative breast cancer. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44611-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44611-4