Design and reporting principles for experimental cancer evolution
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.
Related
- Culture regime as an experimental variable in Caenorhabditis elegans: Cross-format evidence, reproducibility constraints, and proposed minimum reporting framework.
- Engineering Stapled Peptide Inhibitors Reveals Design Principles for Targeting Talin-Induced Integrin Activation
- Risk-based pathology reporting after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastrointestinal cancer: international consensus standards
- Conditional Proximity Labeling in Complex Biological Systems: Design Principles, Emerging Platforms, and Applications
- Experimental evolution reveals genetic routes for adaptive loss of the antibacterial type VI secretion system
BibTeX
@misc{dinh2026design,
title = {{Design and reporting principles for experimental cancer evolution}},
author = {Mina Dinh and J. Arvid Ågren and Jarrell Imamura and Kristi Lin-Rahardja and Jinling Wu and Andriy Marusyk and Maximilian A R Strobl and Jacob G Scott},
howpublished = {EcoEvoRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.32942/x23q49},
url = {https://ecoevorxiv.org/repository/view/15672/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Design and reporting principles for experimental cancer evolution
AU - Mina Dinh
AU - J. Arvid Ågren
AU - Jarrell Imamura
AU - Kristi Lin-Rahardja
AU - Jinling Wu
AU - Andriy Marusyk
AU - Maximilian A R Strobl
AU - Jacob G Scott
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
PB - EcoEvoRxiv
DO - 10.32942/x23q49
UR - https://ecoevorxiv.org/repository/view/15672/
AB - 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.
ER -