Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Communications Biology
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. communications biology
  3. articles
  4. article
Agent-based modeling of cellular dynamics in adoptive cell therapy
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 11 February 2026

Agent-based modeling of cellular dynamics in adoptive cell therapy

  • Yujia Wang  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5264-521X1,
  • Stefano Casarin2,3,4,
  • May Daher  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6026-83975,
  • Vakul Mohanty  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5536-67501,
  • Merve Dede  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0868-58631,
  • Mayra Shanley  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3739-02875,
  • Eleonora Dondossola6,
  • Ludovica La Posta  ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0001-7850-49256,
  • Rafet Başar  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4713-04545,
  • Katayoun Rezvani  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9599-22465 &
  • …
  • Ken Chen  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4013-52791 

Communications Biology , Article number:  (2026) Cite this article

  • 42 Accesses

  • Metrics details

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Subjects

  • Computational models
  • Immunotherapy

Abstract

Adoptive cell therapies (ACT) leverage tumor-immune interactions to cure cancer. Despite promising phase I/II clinical trials of chimeric-antigen-receptor natural killer (CAR-NK) cell therapies, molecular mechanisms and cellular properties required to achieve clinical benefits in broad cancer spectra remain underexplored. While in vitro and in vivo experiments are essential, they are expensive, laborious, and limited to targeted investigations. Here, we present ABMACT (Agent-Based Model for Adoptive Cell Therapy), an in silico approach employing agent-based models (ABM) to simulate the continuous course and dynamics of an evolving tumor-immune ecosystem, consisting of heterogeneous “virtual cells” created based on knowledge and omics data observed in experiments and patients. Applying ABMACT in multiple therapeutic contexts indicates that to achieve optimal ACT efficacy, it is key to enhance immune cellular proliferation, cytotoxicity, and serial killing capacity. With ABMACT, in silico trials can be performed systematically to inform ACT product development and predict optimal treatment strategies.

Similar content being viewed by others

Enhancing cellular immunotherapies in cancer by engineering selective therapeutic resistance

Article 24 July 2024

Next generation automated traceless cell chromatography platform for GMP-compliant cell isolation and activation

Article Open access 21 April 2022

Generation and optimization of off-the-shelf immunotherapeutics targeting TCR-Vβ2+ T cell malignancy

Article Open access 15 January 2024

Data availability

Data for generating figures are provided in Supplementary Data 4 and at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17818689. Public scRNA-seq data used in this work can be obtained from GSE190976, GSE227098, and syn52600685.

Code availability

The feature selection using LME model was performed in R (v4.2.2)108. ABM simulations were performed in Python (v3.9)109 using the MESA framework (v2.2.4)64. The source code for reproducing the work is accessible at: https://github.com/KChen-lab/ABMACT.

References

  1. Li, H., Song, W., Li, Z. & Zhang, M. Preclinical and clinical studies of CAR-NK-cell therapies for malignancies. Front. Immunol. 13, 992232, (2022).

  2. Laskowski, T. J., Biederstädt, A. & Rezvani, K. Natural killer cells in antitumour adoptive cell immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 22, 557–575 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Boyiadzis, M. et al. Phase 1 clinical trial of adoptive immunotherapy using “off-the-shelf” activated natural killer cells in patients with refractory and relapsed acute myeloid leukemia. Cytotherapy 19, 1225–1232 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Williams, B. A. et al. A phase I trial of NK-92 cells for refractory hematological malignancies relapsing after autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation shows safety and evidence of efficacy. Oncotarget 8, 89256–89268 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Marin, D. et al. Safety, efficacy and determinants of response of allogeneic CD19-specific CAR-NK cells in CD19 + B cell tumors: A phase 1/2 trial. Nat. Med. 2024 30:3 30, 772–784 (2024).

  6. Lee, D. W. et al. T cells expressing CD19 chimeric antigen receptors for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children and young adults: A phase 1 dose-escalation trial. Lancet 385, 517–528 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Arai, S. et al. Infusion of the allogeneic cell line NK-92 in patients with advanced renal cell cancer or melanoma: A phase I trial. Cytotherapy 10, 625–632 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Geller, M. A. et al. A phase II study of allogeneic natural killer cell therapy to treat patients with recurrent ovarian and breast cancer. Cytotherapy 13, 98–107 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rosenberg, S. A., Restifo, N. P., Yang, J. C., Morgan, R. A. & Dudley, M. E. Adoptive cell transfer: a clinical path to effective cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 8, 299–308 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Marofi, F. et al. CAR-engineered NK cells; a promising therapeutic option for treatment of hematological malignancies. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 12, 374 (2021).

  11. Rafei, H., Daher, M. & Rezvani, K. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) natural killer (NK)-cell therapy: leveraging the power of innate immunity. Br. J. Haematol. 193, 216–230 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rezvani, K., Rouce, R., Liu, E. & Shpall, E. EngineEring natural killer cells for cancer immunotherapy. Mol. Ther. 25, 1769–1781 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Daher, M., Melo Garcia, L., Li, Y. & Rezvani, K. CAR-NK cells: The next wave of cellular therapy for cancer. Clin. Transl. Immunol. 10, (2021).

  14. Lu, H., Zhao, X., Li, Z., Hu, Y. & Wang, H. From CAR-T Cells to CAR-NK Cells: A developing immunotherapy method for hematological malignancies. Front Oncol. 11, 720501 (2021).

  15. Chu, J. et al. Natural killer cells: a promising immunotherapy for cancer. J. Transl. Med 20, 240 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Caruso, S. et al. Safe and effective off-the-shelf immunotherapy based on CAR.CD123-NK cells for the treatment of acute myeloid leukaemia. J. Hematol. Oncol. 15, 163 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Romanski, A. et al. CD19-CAR engineered NK-92 cells are sufficient to overcome NK cell resistance in B-cell malignancies. J. Cell Mol. Med. 20, 1287–1294 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Choi, E. et al. Engineering CD70-directed CAR-NK cells for the treatment of hematological and solid malignancies. Blood 138, 1691–1691 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Liu, E. et al. Cord blood NK cells engineered to express IL-15 and a CD19-targeted CAR show long-term persistence and potent anti-tumor activity. Leukemia 32, 520 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Shanley, M. et al. Interleukin-21 engineering enhances NK cell activity against glioblastoma via CEBPD. Cancer Cell 42, 1450–1466.e11 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Knelson, E. H. et al. Activation of tumor-cell STING primes NK-cell therapy. Cancer Immunol. Res 10, 947–961 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Daher, M. et al. Targeting a cytokine checkpoint enhances the fitness of armored cord blood CAR-NK cells. Blood 137, 624 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Li, L. et al. Loss of metabolic fitness drives tumor resistance after CAR-NK cell therapy and can be overcome by cytokine engineering. Sci. Adv. 9, eadd6997 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kirouac, D. C., Zmurchok, C. & Morris, D. Making drugs from T cells: The quantitative pharmacology of engineered T cell therapeutics. NPJ Syst. Biol. Appl 10, 31 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mak, I. W. Y., Evaniew, N. & Ghert, M. Lost in translation: Animal models and clinical trials in cancer treatment. Am. J. Transl. Res 6, 114 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kaur, G. & Dufour, J. M. Cell lines: Valuable tools or useless artifacts. Spermatogenesis 2, 1–5 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Yang, S. et al. Organoids: The current status and biomedical applications. MedComm (Beijing) 4, e274 (2023).

  28. Metzcar, J., Wang, Y., Heiland, R. & Macklin, P. A review of cell-based computational modeling in cancer biology. JCO Clin. Cancer Inform 1–13 https://doi.org/10.1200/cci.18.00069 (2019).

  29. del Sol, A. & Jung, S. The importance of computational modeling in stem cell research. Trends Biotechnol. 39, 126–136 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kirschner, D. E. & Linderman, J. J. Mathematical and computational approaches can complement experimental studies of host–pathogen interactions. Cell Microbiol 11, 531–539 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Walpole, J., Papin, J. A. & Peirce, S. M. Multiscale computational models of complex biological systems. Annu Rev. Biomed. Eng. 15, 137–154 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Chavali, A. K. et al. Characterizing emergent properties of immunological systems with multi-cellular rule-based computational modeling. Trends Immunol. 29, 589–599 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Brodland, G. W. How computational models can help unlock biological systems. Semin Cell Dev. Biol. 47–48, 62–73 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Gilpin, L. H. et al. Explaining explanations: An overview of interpretability of machine learning. Proceedings - 2018 IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics, DSAA 2018 80–89 https://doi.org/10.1109/DSAA.2018.00018 (2019).

  35. Feinberg, A. P. & Levchenko, A. Epigenetics as a mediator of plasticity in cancer. Science (1979) 379, (2023).

  36. Gong, C. et al. A computational multiscale agent-based model for simulating spatio-temporal tumour immune response to PD1 and PDL1 inhibition. J R Soc. Interface 14, 20170320 (2017).

  37. Bonabeau, E. Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 7280–7287 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Laubenbacher, R., Hinkelmann, F. & Oremland, M. AgeNt-based Models And Optimal Control In Biology: A Discrete Approach. Mathematical Concepts and Methods in Modern Biology: Using Modern Discrete Models 143–178 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-415780-4.00005-3.

  39. Niida, A., Iwasaki, W. M., Niida, A. & Iwasaki, W. M. Agent-based modeling and analysis of cancer evolution. Simul. Model. https://doi.org/10.5772/INTECHOPEN.100140 (2021).

  40. Kather, J. N. et al. In silico modeling of immunotherapy and stroma-targeting therapies in human colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 77, 6442–6452 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Retzlaff, J., Lai, X., Berking, C. & Vera, J. Integration of transcriptomics data into agent-based models of solid tumor metastasis. Comput Struct. Biotechnol. J. 21, 1930 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Iwasaki, W. M. & Innan, H. Simulation framework for generating intratumor heterogeneity patterns in a cancer cell population. PLoS One 12, e0184229 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kirouac, D. C. et al. Deconvolution of clinical variance in CAR-T cell pharmacology and response. Nat. Biotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1038/S41587-023-01687-X (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Rezvani, K. & Rouce, R. H. The application of natural killer cell immunotherapy for the treatment of cancer. Front. Immunol. 6, 578 (2015).

  45. Pouxvielh, K. et al. Tumor-induced natural killer cell dysfunction is a rapid and reversible process uncoupled from the expression of immune checkpoints. Sci. Adv. 10, eadn0164 (2024).

  46. Sun, J. C. & Lanier, L. L. NK cell development, homeostasis and function: Parallels with CD8+T cells. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 11, 645–657 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sun, J. C., Beilke, J. N., Bezman, N. A. & Lanier, L. L. Homeostatic proliferation generates long-lived natural killer cells that respond against viral infection. J. Exp. Med 208, 357 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sun, J. C., Beilke, J. N. & Lanier, L. L. Adaptive immune features of natural killer cells. Nature 457, 557–561 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Dufva, O. et al. Single-cell functional genomics reveals determinants of sensitivity and resistance to natural killer cells in blood cancers. Immunity 56, 2816–2835.e13 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Du, X. et al. CD226 regulates natural killer cell antitumor responses via phosphorylation-mediated inactivation of transcription factor FOXO1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115, E11731–E11740 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Quatrini, L. et al. The immune checkpoint PD−1 in natural killer cells: Expression, function and targeting in tumour immunotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 12, 1–21 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Tang, F. et al. A pan-cancer single-cell panorama of human natural killer cells. Cell 186, 4235–4251.e20 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Ran, G. H., Lin, Y. Q., Tian, L., Zhang, T., Yan, D. M., Yu, J. H. & Deng, Y. C. Natural killer cell homing and trafficking in tissues and tumors: from biology to application. Signal Transduct. Target Ther. 7, 205 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sanz-Ortega, L. et al. Redirecting NK cells to the lymph nodes to augment their lymphoma-targeting capacity. NPJ Precis Oncol. 8, 1–12 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Yokoyama, W. M., Kim, S. & French, A. R. The dynamic life of natural killer cells. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.immunol.22.012703.104711 22, 405–429 (2004).

  56. Jamieson, A. M., Isnard, P., Dorfman, J. R., Coles, M. C. & Raulet, D. H. Turnover and proliferation of NK cells in steady state and lymphopenic conditions. J. Immunol. 172, 864–870 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Rotte, A. et al. Dose–response correlation for CAR-T cells: A systematic review of clinical studies. J. Immunother. Cancer 10, e005678 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Frigault, M. et al. Dose fractionation of CAR-T cells. A systematic review of clinical outcomes. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 42, 11 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  59. He, J. et al. Synergistic treatment strategy: combining CAR-NK cell therapy and radiotherapy to combat solid tumors. Front. Immunol. 14, 1298683 (2023).

  60. Mamo, T. et al. Infusion reactions in natural killer cell immunotherapy: a retrospective review. Cytotherapy 23, 627–634 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hickey, J. W. et al. Integrating multiplexed imaging and multiscale modeling identifies tumor phenotype conversion as a critical component of therapeutic T cell efficacy. Cell Syst. 15, 322–338.e5 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Dondossola, E. & La Posta, L. Natural Killer Cell Biology Study. Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas Preprint at (2025).

  63. Cogno, N., Axenie, C., Bauer, R. & Vavourakis, V. Agent-based modeling in cancer biomedicine: Applications and tools for calibration and validation. Cancer Biol. Ther. 25, 2344600 (2024).

  64. Kazil Jackie and Masad, D. and C. A. Utilizing Python for Agent-Based Modeling: The Mesa Framework. in Social, Cultural, and Behavioral Modeling (ed. Thomson Robert and Bisgin, H. and D. C. and H. A. and H. M.) 308–317 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2020).

  65. Leonard-Duke, J. et al. Multiscale computational model predicts how environmental changes and drug treatments affect microvascular remodeling in fibrotic disease. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.15.585249 (2024).

  66. Kwon, T., Kwon, O.-S., Cha, H.-J. & Sung, B. J. Stochastic and Heterogeneous Cancer Cell Migration: Experiment and Theory. Sci. Rep. 9, 16297 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Herrera, L. et al. Adult peripheral blood and umbilical cord blood NK cells are good sources for effective CAR therapy against CD19 positive leukemic cells. Sci. Rep. 2019 9:1 9, 1–10 (2019).

  68. Han, J. J. FDA Modernization Act 2.0 allows for alternatives to animal testing. Artif. Organs 47, 449–450 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Vanherberghen, B. et al. Classification of human natural killer cells based on migration behavior and cytotoxic response. Blood 121, 1326–1334 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Castriconi, R. et al. Molecular Mechanisms Directing Migration and Retention of Natural Killer Cells in Human Tissues. Front Immunol. 9, 2324 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Topham, N. J. & Hewitt, E. W. Natural killer cell cytotoxicity: How do they pull the trigger?. Immunology 128, 7 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Paul, S. & Lal, G. The molecular mechanism of natural killer cells function and its importance in cancer immunotherapy. Front Immunol. 8, 290728 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nat. Methods 17, 261–272 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Hermans, L. & O’Sullivan, T. E. No time to die: Epigenetic regulation of natural killer cell survival. Immunol Rev. 323, 61–79 (2024).

  75. Padmanabhan, R. & Meskin, N. Mathematical modeling on immunotherapy and its application for deriving cancer therapy. in Handbook of Cancer and Immunology 1–33 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80962-1_314-1.

  76. Hangasky, J. A. et al. A very long-acting IL-15: Implications for the immunotherapy of cancer. J. Immunother. Cancer 10, e004104 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  77. Bhat, R. & Watzl, C. Serial killing of tumor cells by human natural killer cells - Enhancement by therapeutic antibodies. PLoS One 2, e326 (2007).

  78. Stary, V. & Stary, G. NK cell-mediated recall responses: Memory-like, adaptive, or antigen-specific? Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 10, 208 (2020).

  79. Gang, M. et al. CAR-modified memory-like NK cells exhibit potent responses to NK-resistant lymphomas. Blood 136, 2308 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  80. Paust, S., Blish, C. A. & Reeves, R. K. Redefining memory: Building the case for adaptive NK Cells. J. Virol, 91, e00169-17 (2017).

  81. Guo, C. et al. Single-cell transcriptomics reveal a unique memory-like NK cell subset that accumulates with ageing and correlates with disease severity in COVID-19. Genome Med. 14, 46 (2022).

  82. Sherr, C. J. Cancer cell cycles. Science (1979) 274,(1996).

  83. Ali, A. E. et al. Classifying B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma by using MIB-1 proliferative index in fine-needle aspirates. Cancer Cytopathol. 118, 166–172 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  84. Feucht, D. et al. Preoperative growth dynamics of untreated glioblastoma: Description of an exponential growth type, correlating factors, and association with postoperative survival. Neurooncol. Adv. 6, vdae053 (2024).

  85. Duesberg, P., Stindl, R. & Hehlmann, R. Explaining the high mutation rates of cancer cells to drug and multidrug resistance by chromosome reassortments that are catalyzed by aneuploidy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 14295–14300 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Liang, Q., Huang, Y., He, S. & Chen, K. Pathway centric analysis for single-cell RNA-seq and spatial transcriptomics data with GSDensity. Nat. Commun. 2023 14:1 14, 1–17 (2023).

  87. Long, E. O., Sik Kim, H., Liu, D., Peterson, M. E. & Rajagopalan, S. Controlling NK cell responses: Integration of signals for activation and inhibition. Annu Rev. Immunol. 31, 227–258 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  88. Jia, H., Yang, H., Xiong, H. & Luo, K. Q. NK cell exhaustion in the tumor microenvironment. Front. Immunol. 14, 1303605 (2023).

  89. Littwitz-Salomon, E. et al. Metabolic requirements of NK cells during the acute response against retroviral infection. Nat. Commun. 12, 5376 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  90. Wang, F. et al. TIGIT expression levels on human NK cells correlate with functional heterogeneity among healthy individuals. Eur. J. Immunol. 45, 2886–2897 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  91. Wennerberg, E., Kremer, V., Childs, R. & Lundqvist, A. CXCL10-induced migration of adoptively transferred human natural killer cells toward solid tumors causes regression of tumor growth in vivo. Cancer Immunol., Immunother. 64, 225–235 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  92. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).

  93. Liu, D.-H., Mou, F.-F., An, M. & Xia, P. Human leukocyte antigen and tumor immunotherapy (Review). Int J. Oncol. 62, 68 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  94. Savoia, P., Fava, P. & Casoni, F. & Cremona, O. Targeting the ERK signaling pathway in melanoma. Int J. Mol. Sci. 20, 1483 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  95. Novikov, N. M., Zolotaryova, S. Y., Gautreau, A. M. & Denisov, E. V. Mutational drivers of cancer cell migration and invasion. Br. J. Cancer 124, 102–114 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  96. Cannon, A. C., Uribe-Alvarez, C. & Chernoff, J. RAC1 as a therapeutic target in malignant melanoma. Trends Cancer 6, 478–488 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  97. Zheng, F. et al. The HIF-1α antisense long non-coding RNA drives a positive feedback loop of HIF-1α mediated transactivation and glycolysis. Nat. Commun. 12, 1341 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  98. Yang, Y. & Cao, Y. The impact of VEGF on cancer metastasis and systemic disease. Semin Cancer Biol. 86, 251–261 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  99. Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  100. Korotkevich, G. et al. Fast gene set enrichment analysis. bioRxiv 060012 https://doi.org/10.1101/060012 (2021).

  101. Scornet, E. Trees, forests, and impurity-based variable importance in regression. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré, Probabilités et Statistiques https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:210164587 (2020).

  102. Altmann, A., Toloşi, L., Sander, O. & Lengauer, T. Permutation importance: a corrected feature importance measure. Bioinformatics 26, 1340–1347 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  103. Nikishova, A., Veen, L., Zun, P. & Hoekstra, A. G. Uncertainty Quantification of a Multiscale Model for In-Stent Restenosis. Cardiovasc Eng. Technol. 9, 761–774 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  104. Boelts, J. et al. sbi reloaded: a toolkit for simulation-based inference workflows. J. Open Source Softw. 10, 7754 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  105. Papamakarios, G. & Murray, I. Fast ε-free inference of simulation models with Bayesian conditional density estimation. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS'16). 1036–1044 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, 2016).

  106. Jalalimanesh, A., Shahabi Haghighi, H., Ahmadi, A. & Soltani, M. Simulation-based optimization of radiotherapy: Agent-based modeling and reinforcement learning. Math. Comput Simul. 133, 235–248 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  107. McKeown, S. R. Defining normoxia, physoxia and hypoxia in tumours—implications for treatment response. Br. J. Radio. 87, 20130676 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  108. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ (2022).

  109. Foundation, P. S. Python 3.9: A Programming Language. https://www.python.org/ (2020).

  110. Olofsson, P. E. et al. Distinct migration and contact dynamics of resting and IL-2-activated human natural killer cells. Front. Immunol. 5, 80 (2014).

  111. Bhatt, S. et al. Anti-CD20-interleukin-21 fusokine targets malignant B cells via direct apoptosis and NK-cell–dependent cytotoxicity. Blood 129, 2246–2256 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  112. Wang, K., Wei, G. & Liu, D. CD19: A biomarker for B cell development, lymphoma diagnosis and therapy. Exp. Hematol. Oncol. 1, 36 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is made possible by 2024-345892 from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative DAF, an advised fund of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative Foundation, 5U01CA281902 from National Cancer Institute, and 75N99223S0001 from the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H). This work was supported in part by the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Institute for Cell Therapy Discovery & Innovation. S.C. and E.D. were supported by the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (RP230160) and the National Institutes of Health (R21 CA267312-01A1). S.C. was additionally supported by the John F. Jr and Carolyn Bookout Presidential Distinguished Chair fund. The data used in this study were supported, in part, by grants (1 R01 CA211044-01, 5 P01CA148600-03, and U01CA247760) from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (grants RP180466 and RP180248), the Leukemia Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) Grant (P50CA100632), the Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Brain Cancer grant (P50CA127001), and CPRIT Single Core (RP180684), and a grant (P30 CA016672) from the NIH to the MD Anderson Cancer Center Flow Cytometry and Cellular Imaging Core Facility that assisted with the mass cytometry studies. We sincerely thank Drs. Peng Wei, Ziyi Li, Enli Liu, Li Li, and Ms. Xiaohan Chi for their support and insightful feedback during the development of the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Yujia Wang, Vakul Mohanty, Merve Dede & Ken Chen

  2. Center for Precision Surgery, Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX, USA

    Stefano Casarin

  3. Department of Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA

    Stefano Casarin

  4. LaSIE, UMR 7356 CNRS, La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, France

    Stefano Casarin

  5. Department of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    May Daher, Mayra Shanley, Rafet Başar & Katayoun Rezvani

  6. Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Eleonora Dondossola & Ludovica La Posta

Authors
  1. Yujia Wang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefano Casarin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. May Daher
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vakul Mohanty
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Merve Dede
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mayra Shanley
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Eleonora Dondossola
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ludovica La Posta
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Rafet Başar
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Katayoun Rezvani
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Ken Chen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Y.W. designed the study, developed all computational code, performed the analyses, and wrote the manuscript. S.C. contributed to study design, model development, interpretation of results, and manuscript writing. K.C. conceived and supervised the project, contributed to study design, model development, interpretation of results, and contributed to manuscript writing. M.Da., V.M., and E.D. generated and provided the experimental data, provided guidance throughout, and contributed to manuscript writing. M.S., L.L.P., R.B., and K.R. generated and provided the experimental data. M.De. contributed to project ideation and manuscript writing. All authors discussed the results and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ken Chen.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare the following competing interests: M.Da., R.B., M.S., and K.R., and the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center have an institutional financial conflict of interest with Takeda Pharmaceutical. R.B., K.R., and the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center have an institutional financial conflict of interest with Affimed GmbH. K.R. participates on the Scientific Advisory Board for Avenge Bio, Virogin Biotech, Navan Technologies, Caribou Biosciences, Bit Bio Limited, Replay Holdings, oNKo Innate, and The Alliance for Cancer Gene Therapy ACGT. K.R. is the Scientific founder of Syena. M. Da. participates on the Scientific Advisory Board for Cellsbin.

Peer review

Peer review information

Communications Biology thanks Christopher Schorr, Sadegh Marzban and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editors: Dr. Nilanjan Banerjee and Dr. Laura Rodriguez Perez.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Description of Additional Supplementary File

Supplementary Data 1

Supplementary Data 2

Supplementary Data 3

Supplementary Data 4

Reporting summary

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/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, Y., Casarin, S., Daher, M. et al. Agent-based modeling of cellular dynamics in adoptive cell therapy. Commun Biol (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-026-09653-4

Download citation

  • Received: 26 March 2025

  • Accepted: 27 January 2026

  • Published: 11 February 2026

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-026-09653-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Download PDF

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • Reviews & Analysis
  • News & Comment
  • Collections
  • Follow us on X
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • Journal Information
  • Open Access Fees and Funding
  • Journal Metrics
  • Editors
  • Editorial Board
  • Calls for Papers
  • Referees
  • Contact
  • Editorial policies
  • Aims & Scope

Publish with us

  • For authors
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Communications Biology (Commun Biol)

ISSN 2399-3642 (online)

nature.com sitemap

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing