Design and reporting principles for experimental cancer evolution

Evolutionary processes are inherently stochastic, such that independently evolving populations exposed to identical conditions may not follow identical trajectories. In cancer, this stochasticity contributes to diverse resistance pathways in tumor cell populations exposed to the same therapeutic pressures. Experimental evolution provides a controlled framework for studying these dynamics by exposing cells to sustained drug treatment and allowing resistance to evolve over time. While powerful, insufficient documentation of experimental design can obscure biologically meaningful stochasticity and hinder comparisons across studies. Here, we argue for the importance of rigorous experimental design and transparent reporting in cancer experimental evolution. We describe eight key factors that should be considered when designing an experimental evolution study: (1) choosing a model system, (2) methodology for tracking evolution, (3) defining evolutionary replicates, (4) selecting treatment dose, (5) determining initial seeding density, (6) defining evolutionary cycles, (7) selecting experiments to perform at each cycle, and (8) deciding when to end the experiment. Careful consideration of these factors improves repeatability and facilitates identification of deterministic and contingent features of resistance evolution. For cancer biologists, these design choices determine whether resistance mechanisms, collateral sensitivities, persister states, and clinically actionable vulnerabilities can be interpreted as reproducible biology rather than protocol-specific artifacts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.32942/x23q49
Primary Topic
Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Type
preprint

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Design and reporting principles for experimental cancer evolution

Andriy Marusyk, Mina N. Dinh, Kristi Lin‐Rahardja, Jinling Wu et al.
1 links
Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
preprint

Design and reporting principles for experimental cancer evolution

Andriy Marusyk, Mina N. Dinh, Kristi Lin‐Rahardja, Jinling Wu, Jarrell Imamura, Jacob Scott, Maximilian Strobl, J. Arvid Ågren
preprint en

Abstract

Evolutionary processes are inherently stochastic, such that independently evolving populations exposed to identical conditions may not follow identical trajectories. In cancer, this stochasticity contributes to diverse resistance pathways in tumor cell populations exposed to the same therapeutic pressures. Experimental evolution provides a controlled framework for studying these dynamics by exposing cells to sustained drug treatment and allowing resistance to evolve over time. While powerful, insufficient documentation of experimental design can obscure biologically meaningful stochasticity and hinder comparisons across studies. Here, we argue for the importance of rigorous experimental design and transparent reporting in cancer experimental evolution. We describe eight key factors that should be considered when designing an experimental evolution study: (1) choosing a model system, (2) methodology for tracking evolution, (3) defining evolutionary replicates, (4) selecting treatment dose, (5) determining initial seeding density, (6) defining evolutionary cycles, (7) selecting experiments to perform at each cycle, and (8) deciding when to end the experiment. Careful consideration of these factors improves repeatability and facilitates identification of deterministic and contingent features of resistance evolution. For cancer biologists, these design choices determine whether resistance mechanisms, collateral sensitivities, persister states, and clinically actionable vulnerabilities can be interpreted as reproducible biology rather than protocol-specific artifacts.

Cleveland Clinic (US), University of Rochester Medical Center (US), Moffitt Cancer Center (US), Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine (US), Stanford Medicine (US), Cleveland Clinic Research (US), University of Rochester (US), Case Western Reserve University (US), Stanford University (US)
National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, HORIZON EUROPE Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions
Good health and well-being
Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon