Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman systems for tumour growth

Previous Article
Comprehensive analysis of integer-order, Caputo-Fabrizio (CF) and Atangana-Baleanu (ABC) fractional time derivative for MHD Oldroyd-B fluid with slip effect and time dependent boundary condition
DCDS-S Home
This Issue
Next Article
An efficient numerical method for fractional model of allelopathic stimulatory phytoplankton species with Mittag-Leffler law

doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021034

Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman systems for tumour growth

Matthias Ebenbeck ^1, , Harald Garcke ^1,, and Robert Nürnberg ^2,

1.	Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Regensburg, 93040 Regensburg, Germany
2.	Department of Mathematics, University of Trento, Trento, Italy

^* Corresponding author: Harald Garcke

Received March 2020 Revised January 2021 Published March 2021

A phase field model for tumour growth is introduced that is based on a Brinkman law for convective velocity fields. The model couples a convective Cahn–Hilliard equation for the evolution of the tumour to a reaction-diffusion-advection equation for a nutrient and to a Brinkman–Stokes type law for the fluid velocity. The model is derived from basic thermodynamical principles, sharp interface limits are derived by matched asymptotics and an existence theory is presented for the case of a mobility which degenerates in one phase leading to a degenerate parabolic equation of fourth order. Finally numerical results describe qualitative features of the solutions and illustrate instabilities in certain situations.

Keywords: Tumour growth, Cahn–Hilliard equation, phase field model, Brinkman model, existence, singular limit, finite elements.

Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary: 35K35; Secondary: 35K57, 35Q92, 35R35, 35C20, 65M60, 92C42.

Citation: Matthias Ebenbeck, Harald Garcke, Robert Nürnberg. Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman systems for tumour growth. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021034

References:

[1]	H. Abels, H. Garcke and G. Grün, Thermodynamically consistent, frame indifferent diffuse interface models for incompressible two-phase flows with different densities, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 22 (2012), 1150013. doi: 10.1142/S0218202511500138. Google Scholar
[2]	A. Agosti, P. F. Antonietti, P. Ciarletta, M. Grasselli and M. Verani, A Cahn-Hilliard-type equation with application to tumor growth dynamics, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 40 (2017), 7598-7626. doi: 10.1002/mma.4548. Google Scholar
[3]	D. Ambrosi and L. Preziosi, On the closure of mass balance models for tumor growth, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 12 (2002), 737-754. doi: 10.1142/S0218202502001878. Google Scholar
[4]	P. R. Amestoy, T. A. Davis and I. S. Duff, Algorithm 837: AMD, an approximate minimum degree ordering algorithm, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 30 (2004), 381-388. doi: 10.1145/1024074.1024081. Google Scholar
[5]	L. Baňas and R. Nürnberg, Finite element approximation of a three dimensional phase field model for void electromigration, J. Sci. Comp., 37 (2008), 202-232. doi: 10.1007/s10915-008-9203-y. Google Scholar
[6]	J. W. Barrett, H. Garcke and R. Nürnberg, Chapter 4 - Parametric finite element approximations of curvature-driven interface evolutions, in Geometric Partial Differential Equations - Part I, Handbook of Numerical Analysis, 21, Elsevier (2020), 275–423. doi: 10.1016/bs.hna.2019.05.002. Google Scholar
[7]	J. W. Barrett, H. Garcke and R. Nürnberg, Stable phase field approximations of anisotropic solidification, IMA J. Numer. Anal., 34 (2014), 1289-1327. doi: 10.1093/imanum/drt044. Google Scholar
[8]	J. W. Barrett, R. Nürnberg and V. Styles, Finite element approximation of a phase field model for void electromigration, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 42 (2004), 738-772. doi: 10.1137/S0036142902413421. Google Scholar
[9]	N. Bellomo, N. K. Li and P. K. Maini, On the foundations of cancer modelling: selected topics, speculations, and perspectives, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 18 (2008), 593-646. doi: 10.1142/S0218202508002796. Google Scholar
[10]	H. Byrne and M. A. J. Chaplain, Free boundary value problems associated with the growth and development of multicellular spheroids, European J. Appl. Math., 8 (1997), 639-658. doi: 10.1017/S0956792597003264. Google Scholar
[11]	P. G. Ciarlet, Mathematical Elasticity. Vol. I. Three-Dimensional Elasticity, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1988. Google Scholar
[12]	P. Colli, G. Gilardi and D. Hilhorst, On a Cahn–Hilliard type phase field system related to tumor growth, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 35 (2015), 2423-2442. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2015.35.2423. Google Scholar
[13]	V. Cristini, H. B. Frieboes, R. Gatenby, S. Caserta, M. Ferrari and J. Sinek, Morphologic instability and cancer invasion, Clin. Cancer Res., 11 (2005), 6772-6779. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0852. Google Scholar
[14]	V. Cristini, H. B. Frieboes, X. Li, J. S. Lowengrub, P. Macklin, S. Sanga, S. M. Wise and X. Zheng, Nonlinear modeling and simulation of tumor growth, Selected Topics in Cancer Modeling, Birkhäuser Boston, (2008), 113–181. Google Scholar
[15]	V. Cristini, X. Li, J. S. Lowengrub and S. M. Wise, Nonlinear simulations of solid tumor growth using a mixture model: Invasion and branching, J. Math. Biol., 58 (2009), 723-763. doi: 10.1007/s00285-008-0215-x. Google Scholar
[16]	V. Cristini and J. Lowengrub, Multiscale Modeling of Cancer: An Integrated Experimental and Mathematical Modeling Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511781452. Google Scholar
[17]	V. Cristini, J. Lowengrub and Q. Nie, Nonlinear simulation of tumor growth, J. Math. Biol., 46 (2003), 191-224. doi: 10.1007/s00285-002-0174-6. Google Scholar
[18]	T. A. Davis, Algorithm 832: UMFPACK V4.3—an unsymmetric-pattern multifrontal method, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 30 (2004), 196-199. doi: 10.1145/992200.992206. Google Scholar
[19]	T. A. Davis, Algorithm 849: A concise sparse Cholesky factorization package, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 31 (2005), 587-591. doi: 10.1145/1114268.1114277. Google Scholar
[20]	M. Ebenbeck, Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman Models for Tumour Growth: Modelling, Analysis and Optimal Control, Ph.D thesis, University Regensburg, 2020. Google Scholar
[21]	M. Ebenbeck and H. Garcke, Analysis of a Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman model for tumour growth with chemotaxis, J. Differential Equations, 266 (2019), 5998-6036. doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2018.10.045. Google Scholar
[22]	M. Ebenbeck and H. Garcke, On a Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman model for tumor growth and its singular limits, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 51 (2019), 1868-1912. doi: 10.1137/18M1228104. Google Scholar
[23]	C. Eck, H. Garcke and P. Knabner, Mathematical Modeling, Springer, Cham, 2017. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-55161-6. Google Scholar
[24]	C. M. Elliott and H. Garcke, On the Cahn–Hilliard equation with degenerate mobility, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 27 (1996), 404-423. doi: 10.1137/S0036141094267662. Google Scholar
[25]	J. Eyles, J. R. King and V. Styles, A tractable mathematical model for tissue growth, Interfaces Free Bound., 21 (2019), 463-493. doi: 10.4171/IFB/428. Google Scholar
[26]	S. J. Franks and J. R. King, Interactions between a uniformly proliferating tumour and its surroundings: Stability analysis for variable material properties, Internat. J. Engrg. Sci., 47 (2009), 1182-1192. doi: 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2009.07.004. Google Scholar
[27]	S. J. Franks and J. R. King, Interactions between a uniformly proliferating tumour and its surroundings: Uniform material properties, Math. Med. Biol., 20 (2003), 47-89. doi: 10.1093/imammb/20.1.47. Google Scholar
[28]	H. B. Frieboes, J. S. Lowengrub, S. Wise, X. Zheng, P. Macklin, E. L. Bearer and V. Cristini, Computer simulation of glioma growth and morphology, NeuroImage, 37 (2007), 59-70. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.03.008. Google Scholar
[29]	A. Friedman, A free boundary problem for a coupled system of elliptic, hyperbolic, and Stokes equations modeling tumor growth, Interfaces Free Bound., 8 (2006), 247-261. doi: 10.4171/IFB/142. Google Scholar
[30]	A. Friedman, Free boundary problems associated with multiscale tumor models, Math. Model. Nat. Phenom., 4 (2009), 134-155. doi: 10.1051/mmnp/20094306. Google Scholar
[31]	A. Friedman, Mathematical analysis and challenges arising from models of tumor growth, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 17 (2007), 1751-1772. doi: 10.1142/S0218202507002467. Google Scholar
[32]	A. Friedmann and B. Hu, Bifurcation for a free boundary problem modeling tumor growth by Stokes equation, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 39 (2007), 174-194. doi: 10.1137/060656292. Google Scholar
[33]	S. Frigeri, M. Grasselli and E. Rocca, On a diffuse interface model of tumour growth, European J. Appl. Math., 26 (2015), 215-243. doi: 10.1017/S0956792514000436. Google Scholar
[34]	S. Frigeri, K. F. Lam and E. Rocca, On a diffuse interface model for tumour growth with non-local interactions and degenerate mobilities, in Solvability, Regularity, and Optimal Control of Boundary Value Problems for PDEs (Springer INdAM ser.), 22 Springer Cham, (2017), 217–254. Google Scholar
[35]	M. Fritz, E. A. B. F. Lima, J. T. Oden and B. Wohlmuth, On the unsteady Darcy–Forchheimer–Brinkman equation in local and nonlocal tumor growth models, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 29 (2019), 1691-1731. doi: 10.1142/S0218202519500325. Google Scholar
[36]	H. Garcke and K. F. Lam, Global weak solutions and asymptotic limits of a Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system modelling tumour growth, AIMS Math., 1 (2016), 318-360. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.318. Google Scholar
[37]	H. Garcke and K. F. Lam, On a Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system for tumour growth with solution dependent source terms, Trends in Applications of Mathematics to Mechanics, Springer, Cham 27 (2018), 243–264. Google Scholar
[38]	H. Garcke, K. F. Lam, R. Nürnberg and E. Sitka, A multiphase Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy model for tumour growth with necrosis, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 28 (2018), 525-577. doi: 10.1142/S0218202518500148. Google Scholar
[39]	H. Garcke, K. F. Lam and A. Signori, On a phase field model of Cahn-Hilliard type for tumour growth with mechanical effects, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl., 57 (2021), 103192. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2020.103192. Google Scholar
[40]	H. Garcke, K. F. Lam, E. Sitka and V. Styles, A Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy model for tumour growth with chemotaxis and active transport, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 26 (2016), 1095-1148. doi: 10.1142/S0218202516500263. Google Scholar
[41]	H. Garcke and B. Stinner, Second order phase field asymptotics for multi-component systems, Interfaces Free Bound., 8 (2006), 131-157. doi: 10.4171/IFB/138. Google Scholar
[42]	Y. Giga and A. Novotný, eds, Handbook of Mathematical Analysis in Mechanics of Viscous Fluids, Springer, Cham, 2018. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-13344-7. Google Scholar
[43]	H. P. Greenspan, On the growth and stability of cell cultures and solid tumors, J. Theoret. Biol., 56 (1976), 229-242. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(76)80054-9. Google Scholar
[44]	M. E. Gurtin, Generalized Ginzburg–Landau and Cahn–Hilliard equations based on a microforce balance, Phys. D, 92 (1996), 178-192. doi: 10.1016/0167-2789(95)00173-5. Google Scholar
[45]	M. E. Gurtin, E. Fried and L. Anand, The Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Continua, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511762956. Google Scholar
[46]	A. Hawkins-Daarud, K. G. van der Zee and J. T. Oden, Numerical simulation of a thermodynamically consistent four-species tumor growth model, Int. J. Numer. Methods Biomed. Eng., 28 (2012), 3-24. doi: 10.1002/cnm.1467. Google Scholar
[47]	D. Hilhorst, J. Kampmann, T. N. Nguyen and K. G. van Der Zee, Formal asymptotic limit of a diffuse-interface tumor-growth model, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 25 (2015), 1011-1043. doi: 10.1142/S0218202515500268. Google Scholar
[48]	J. Jiang, H. Wu and S. Zheng, Well-posedness and long-time behavior of a non-autonomous Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system with mass source modeling, J. Differential Equations, 259 (2015), 3032-3077. doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2015.04.009. Google Scholar
[49]	I.-S. Liu, Method of Lagrange multipliers for exploitation of the entropy principle, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 46 (1972), 131-148. doi: 10.1007/BF00250688. Google Scholar
[50]	J. S. Lowengrub, H. B. Frieboes, F. Jin, Y.-L. Chuang, X. Li, P. Macklin, S. M. Wise and V. Cristini, Nonlinear modelling of cancer: Bridging the gap between cells and tumours, Nonlinearity, 23 (2010), R1–R91. doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/23/1/R01. Google Scholar
[51]	J. Lowengrub, E. Titi and K. Zhao, Analysis of a mixture model of tumor growth, European J. Appl. Math., 24 (2013), 691-734. doi: 10.1017/S0956792513000144. Google Scholar
[52]	J. Lowengrub and L. Truskinovsky, Quasi-incompressible Cahn–Hilliard fluids and topological transitions, R. Soc. Lond. Proc. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci., 454 (1998), 2617-2654. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1998.0273. Google Scholar
[53]	P. Macklin and J. Lowengrub, An improved geometry-aware curvature discretization for level set methods: Application to tumor growth, J. Comput. Phys., 215 (2006), 392-401. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2005.11.016. Google Scholar
[54]	I. Müller, Thermodynamics, Pitman Advanced Publishing Program, London, 1985. Google Scholar
[55]	J. T. Oden, A. Hawkins and S. Prudhomme, General diffuse-interface theories and an approach to predictive tumor growth modeling, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 20 (2010), 477-517. doi: 10.1142/S0218202510004313. Google Scholar
[56]	B. Perthame and A. Poulain, Relaxation of the Cahn-Hilliard equation with singular single-well potential and degenerate mobility, European J. Appl. Math., 32 (2021), 89-112. doi: 10.1017/S0956792520000054. Google Scholar
[57]	K. Pham, H. B. Frieboes, V. Cristini and J. Lowengrub, Predictions of tumour morphological stability and evaluation against experimental observations, J. R. Soc. Interface, 8 (2011), 16-29. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2010.0194. Google Scholar
[58]	E. Rocca and G. Schimperna, Universal attractor for some singular phase transition systems, Phys. D, 192 (2004), 279-307. doi: 10.1016/j.physd.2004.01.024. Google Scholar
[59]	T. Roose, S. J. Chapman and P. K. Maini, Mathematical models of avascular tumor growth, SIAM Rev., 49 (2007), 179-208. doi: 10.1137/S0036144504446291. Google Scholar
[60]	A. Schmidt and K. G. Siebert, Design of Adaptive Finite Element Software: The Finite Element Toolbox ALBERTA, 42, Springer, Berlin, 2005. Google Scholar
[61]	H. Sohr, The Navier-Stokes equations. An Elementary Functional Analytic Approach, Birkhäuser/Springer, Basel, 2001. Google Scholar
[62]	S. Srinivasan and K. R. Rajagopal, A thermodynamic basis for the derivation of the Darcy, Forchheimer and Brinkman models for flows through porous media and their generalizations, Internat. J. Non-Linear Mech., 58 (2014), 162-166. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2013.09.004. Google Scholar
[63]	S. M. Wise, J. S. Lowengrub, H. B. Frieboes and V. Cristini, Three-dimensional multispecies nonlinear tumor growth—I: Model and numerical method, J. Theoret. Biol., 253 (2008), 524-543. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.03.027. Google Scholar
[64]	J. Wu and S. Cui, Asymptotic behavior of solutions of a free boundary problem modelling the growth of tumors with Stokes equations, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. A, 24 (2009), 625-651. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2009.24.625. Google Scholar
[65]	X. Zheng, S. M. Wise and V. Cristini, Nonlinear simulation of tumor necrosis, neo-vascularization and tissue invasion via an adaptive finite-element/level-set method, Bull. Math. Biol., 67 (2005), 211-259. doi: 10.1016/j.bulm.2004.08.001. Google Scholar

show all references

References:

[1]	H. Abels, H. Garcke and G. Grün, Thermodynamically consistent, frame indifferent diffuse interface models for incompressible two-phase flows with different densities, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 22 (2012), 1150013. doi: 10.1142/S0218202511500138. Google Scholar
[2]	A. Agosti, P. F. Antonietti, P. Ciarletta, M. Grasselli and M. Verani, A Cahn-Hilliard-type equation with application to tumor growth dynamics, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 40 (2017), 7598-7626. doi: 10.1002/mma.4548. Google Scholar
[3]	D. Ambrosi and L. Preziosi, On the closure of mass balance models for tumor growth, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 12 (2002), 737-754. doi: 10.1142/S0218202502001878. Google Scholar
[4]	P. R. Amestoy, T. A. Davis and I. S. Duff, Algorithm 837: AMD, an approximate minimum degree ordering algorithm, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 30 (2004), 381-388. doi: 10.1145/1024074.1024081. Google Scholar
[5]	L. Baňas and R. Nürnberg, Finite element approximation of a three dimensional phase field model for void electromigration, J. Sci. Comp., 37 (2008), 202-232. doi: 10.1007/s10915-008-9203-y. Google Scholar
[6]	J. W. Barrett, H. Garcke and R. Nürnberg, Chapter 4 - Parametric finite element approximations of curvature-driven interface evolutions, in Geometric Partial Differential Equations - Part I, Handbook of Numerical Analysis, 21, Elsevier (2020), 275–423. doi: 10.1016/bs.hna.2019.05.002. Google Scholar
[7]	J. W. Barrett, H. Garcke and R. Nürnberg, Stable phase field approximations of anisotropic solidification, IMA J. Numer. Anal., 34 (2014), 1289-1327. doi: 10.1093/imanum/drt044. Google Scholar
[8]	J. W. Barrett, R. Nürnberg and V. Styles, Finite element approximation of a phase field model for void electromigration, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 42 (2004), 738-772. doi: 10.1137/S0036142902413421. Google Scholar
[9]	N. Bellomo, N. K. Li and P. K. Maini, On the foundations of cancer modelling: selected topics, speculations, and perspectives, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 18 (2008), 593-646. doi: 10.1142/S0218202508002796. Google Scholar
[10]	H. Byrne and M. A. J. Chaplain, Free boundary value problems associated with the growth and development of multicellular spheroids, European J. Appl. Math., 8 (1997), 639-658. doi: 10.1017/S0956792597003264. Google Scholar
[11]	P. G. Ciarlet, Mathematical Elasticity. Vol. I. Three-Dimensional Elasticity, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1988. Google Scholar
[12]	P. Colli, G. Gilardi and D. Hilhorst, On a Cahn–Hilliard type phase field system related to tumor growth, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 35 (2015), 2423-2442. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2015.35.2423. Google Scholar
[13]	V. Cristini, H. B. Frieboes, R. Gatenby, S. Caserta, M. Ferrari and J. Sinek, Morphologic instability and cancer invasion, Clin. Cancer Res., 11 (2005), 6772-6779. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0852. Google Scholar
[14]	V. Cristini, H. B. Frieboes, X. Li, J. S. Lowengrub, P. Macklin, S. Sanga, S. M. Wise and X. Zheng, Nonlinear modeling and simulation of tumor growth, Selected Topics in Cancer Modeling, Birkhäuser Boston, (2008), 113–181. Google Scholar
[15]	V. Cristini, X. Li, J. S. Lowengrub and S. M. Wise, Nonlinear simulations of solid tumor growth using a mixture model: Invasion and branching, J. Math. Biol., 58 (2009), 723-763. doi: 10.1007/s00285-008-0215-x. Google Scholar
[16]	V. Cristini and J. Lowengrub, Multiscale Modeling of Cancer: An Integrated Experimental and Mathematical Modeling Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511781452. Google Scholar
[17]	V. Cristini, J. Lowengrub and Q. Nie, Nonlinear simulation of tumor growth, J. Math. Biol., 46 (2003), 191-224. doi: 10.1007/s00285-002-0174-6. Google Scholar
[18]	T. A. Davis, Algorithm 832: UMFPACK V4.3—an unsymmetric-pattern multifrontal method, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 30 (2004), 196-199. doi: 10.1145/992200.992206. Google Scholar
[19]	T. A. Davis, Algorithm 849: A concise sparse Cholesky factorization package, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 31 (2005), 587-591. doi: 10.1145/1114268.1114277. Google Scholar
[20]	M. Ebenbeck, Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman Models for Tumour Growth: Modelling, Analysis and Optimal Control, Ph.D thesis, University Regensburg, 2020. Google Scholar
[21]	M. Ebenbeck and H. Garcke, Analysis of a Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman model for tumour growth with chemotaxis, J. Differential Equations, 266 (2019), 5998-6036. doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2018.10.045. Google Scholar
[22]	M. Ebenbeck and H. Garcke, On a Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman model for tumor growth and its singular limits, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 51 (2019), 1868-1912. doi: 10.1137/18M1228104. Google Scholar
[23]	C. Eck, H. Garcke and P. Knabner, Mathematical Modeling, Springer, Cham, 2017. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-55161-6. Google Scholar
[24]	C. M. Elliott and H. Garcke, On the Cahn–Hilliard equation with degenerate mobility, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 27 (1996), 404-423. doi: 10.1137/S0036141094267662. Google Scholar
[25]	J. Eyles, J. R. King and V. Styles, A tractable mathematical model for tissue growth, Interfaces Free Bound., 21 (2019), 463-493. doi: 10.4171/IFB/428. Google Scholar
[26]	S. J. Franks and J. R. King, Interactions between a uniformly proliferating tumour and its surroundings: Stability analysis for variable material properties, Internat. J. Engrg. Sci., 47 (2009), 1182-1192. doi: 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2009.07.004. Google Scholar
[27]	S. J. Franks and J. R. King, Interactions between a uniformly proliferating tumour and its surroundings: Uniform material properties, Math. Med. Biol., 20 (2003), 47-89. doi: 10.1093/imammb/20.1.47. Google Scholar
[28]	H. B. Frieboes, J. S. Lowengrub, S. Wise, X. Zheng, P. Macklin, E. L. Bearer and V. Cristini, Computer simulation of glioma growth and morphology, NeuroImage, 37 (2007), 59-70. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.03.008. Google Scholar
[29]	A. Friedman, A free boundary problem for a coupled system of elliptic, hyperbolic, and Stokes equations modeling tumor growth, Interfaces Free Bound., 8 (2006), 247-261. doi: 10.4171/IFB/142. Google Scholar
[30]	A. Friedman, Free boundary problems associated with multiscale tumor models, Math. Model. Nat. Phenom., 4 (2009), 134-155. doi: 10.1051/mmnp/20094306. Google Scholar
[31]	A. Friedman, Mathematical analysis and challenges arising from models of tumor growth, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 17 (2007), 1751-1772. doi: 10.1142/S0218202507002467. Google Scholar
[32]	A. Friedmann and B. Hu, Bifurcation for a free boundary problem modeling tumor growth by Stokes equation, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 39 (2007), 174-194. doi: 10.1137/060656292. Google Scholar
[33]	S. Frigeri, M. Grasselli and E. Rocca, On a diffuse interface model of tumour growth, European J. Appl. Math., 26 (2015), 215-243. doi: 10.1017/S0956792514000436. Google Scholar
[34]	S. Frigeri, K. F. Lam and E. Rocca, On a diffuse interface model for tumour growth with non-local interactions and degenerate mobilities, in Solvability, Regularity, and Optimal Control of Boundary Value Problems for PDEs (Springer INdAM ser.), 22 Springer Cham, (2017), 217–254. Google Scholar
[35]	M. Fritz, E. A. B. F. Lima, J. T. Oden and B. Wohlmuth, On the unsteady Darcy–Forchheimer–Brinkman equation in local and nonlocal tumor growth models, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 29 (2019), 1691-1731. doi: 10.1142/S0218202519500325. Google Scholar
[36]	H. Garcke and K. F. Lam, Global weak solutions and asymptotic limits of a Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system modelling tumour growth, AIMS Math., 1 (2016), 318-360. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.318. Google Scholar
[37]	H. Garcke and K. F. Lam, On a Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system for tumour growth with solution dependent source terms, Trends in Applications of Mathematics to Mechanics, Springer, Cham 27 (2018), 243–264. Google Scholar
[38]	H. Garcke, K. F. Lam, R. Nürnberg and E. Sitka, A multiphase Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy model for tumour growth with necrosis, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 28 (2018), 525-577. doi: 10.1142/S0218202518500148. Google Scholar
[39]	H. Garcke, K. F. Lam and A. Signori, On a phase field model of Cahn-Hilliard type for tumour growth with mechanical effects, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl., 57 (2021), 103192. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2020.103192. Google Scholar
[40]	H. Garcke, K. F. Lam, E. Sitka and V. Styles, A Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy model for tumour growth with chemotaxis and active transport, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 26 (2016), 1095-1148. doi: 10.1142/S0218202516500263. Google Scholar
[41]	H. Garcke and B. Stinner, Second order phase field asymptotics for multi-component systems, Interfaces Free Bound., 8 (2006), 131-157. doi: 10.4171/IFB/138. Google Scholar
[42]	Y. Giga and A. Novotný, eds, Handbook of Mathematical Analysis in Mechanics of Viscous Fluids, Springer, Cham, 2018. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-13344-7. Google Scholar
[43]	H. P. Greenspan, On the growth and stability of cell cultures and solid tumors, J. Theoret. Biol., 56 (1976), 229-242. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(76)80054-9. Google Scholar
[44]	M. E. Gurtin, Generalized Ginzburg–Landau and Cahn–Hilliard equations based on a microforce balance, Phys. D, 92 (1996), 178-192. doi: 10.1016/0167-2789(95)00173-5. Google Scholar
[45]	M. E. Gurtin, E. Fried and L. Anand, The Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Continua, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511762956. Google Scholar
[46]	A. Hawkins-Daarud, K. G. van der Zee and J. T. Oden, Numerical simulation of a thermodynamically consistent four-species tumor growth model, Int. J. Numer. Methods Biomed. Eng., 28 (2012), 3-24. doi: 10.1002/cnm.1467. Google Scholar
[47]	D. Hilhorst, J. Kampmann, T. N. Nguyen and K. G. van Der Zee, Formal asymptotic limit of a diffuse-interface tumor-growth model, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 25 (2015), 1011-1043. doi: 10.1142/S0218202515500268. Google Scholar
[48]	J. Jiang, H. Wu and S. Zheng, Well-posedness and long-time behavior of a non-autonomous Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system with mass source modeling, J. Differential Equations, 259 (2015), 3032-3077. doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2015.04.009. Google Scholar
[49]	I.-S. Liu, Method of Lagrange multipliers for exploitation of the entropy principle, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 46 (1972), 131-148. doi: 10.1007/BF00250688. Google Scholar
[50]	J. S. Lowengrub, H. B. Frieboes, F. Jin, Y.-L. Chuang, X. Li, P. Macklin, S. M. Wise and V. Cristini, Nonlinear modelling of cancer: Bridging the gap between cells and tumours, Nonlinearity, 23 (2010), R1–R91. doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/23/1/R01. Google Scholar
[51]	J. Lowengrub, E. Titi and K. Zhao, Analysis of a mixture model of tumor growth, European J. Appl. Math., 24 (2013), 691-734. doi: 10.1017/S0956792513000144. Google Scholar
[52]	J. Lowengrub and L. Truskinovsky, Quasi-incompressible Cahn–Hilliard fluids and topological transitions, R. Soc. Lond. Proc. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci., 454 (1998), 2617-2654. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1998.0273. Google Scholar
[53]	P. Macklin and J. Lowengrub, An improved geometry-aware curvature discretization for level set methods: Application to tumor growth, J. Comput. Phys., 215 (2006), 392-401. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2005.11.016. Google Scholar
[54]	I. Müller, Thermodynamics, Pitman Advanced Publishing Program, London, 1985. Google Scholar
[55]	J. T. Oden, A. Hawkins and S. Prudhomme, General diffuse-interface theories and an approach to predictive tumor growth modeling, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 20 (2010), 477-517. doi: 10.1142/S0218202510004313. Google Scholar
[56]	B. Perthame and A. Poulain, Relaxation of the Cahn-Hilliard equation with singular single-well potential and degenerate mobility, European J. Appl. Math., 32 (2021), 89-112. doi: 10.1017/S0956792520000054. Google Scholar
[57]	K. Pham, H. B. Frieboes, V. Cristini and J. Lowengrub, Predictions of tumour morphological stability and evaluation against experimental observations, J. R. Soc. Interface, 8 (2011), 16-29. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2010.0194. Google Scholar
[58]	E. Rocca and G. Schimperna, Universal attractor for some singular phase transition systems, Phys. D, 192 (2004), 279-307. doi: 10.1016/j.physd.2004.01.024. Google Scholar
[59]	T. Roose, S. J. Chapman and P. K. Maini, Mathematical models of avascular tumor growth, SIAM Rev., 49 (2007), 179-208. doi: 10.1137/S0036144504446291. Google Scholar
[60]	A. Schmidt and K. G. Siebert, Design of Adaptive Finite Element Software: The Finite Element Toolbox ALBERTA, 42, Springer, Berlin, 2005. Google Scholar
[61]	H. Sohr, The Navier-Stokes equations. An Elementary Functional Analytic Approach, Birkhäuser/Springer, Basel, 2001. Google Scholar
[62]	S. Srinivasan and K. R. Rajagopal, A thermodynamic basis for the derivation of the Darcy, Forchheimer and Brinkman models for flows through porous media and their generalizations, Internat. J. Non-Linear Mech., 58 (2014), 162-166. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2013.09.004. Google Scholar
[63]	S. M. Wise, J. S. Lowengrub, H. B. Frieboes and V. Cristini, Three-dimensional multispecies nonlinear tumor growth—I: Model and numerical method, J. Theoret. Biol., 253 (2008), 524-543. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.03.027. Google Scholar
[64]	J. Wu and S. Cui, Asymptotic behavior of solutions of a free boundary problem modelling the growth of tumors with Stokes equations, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. A, 24 (2009), 625-651. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2009.24.625. Google Scholar
[65]	X. Zheng, S. M. Wise and V. Cristini, Nonlinear simulation of tumor necrosis, neo-vascularization and tissue invasion via an adaptive finite-element/level-set method, Bull. Math. Biol., 67 (2005), 211-259. doi: 10.1016/j.bulm.2004.08.001. Google Scholar

Figure 1. Typical situation for the formal asymptotic analysis

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 2. The tumour and healthy regions $ \Omega_T $ and $ \Omega_H $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 3. Schematic sketch of the inner region close to $ \Sigma(0) $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4. Initial tumour size for initial data $ r $: A slightly perturbed sphere

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 5. Comparison of Cahn--Hilliard--Darcy and Cahn--Hilliard--Brinkman models: Tumour at time $ t = 12 $ for $ \beta = 0.1 $, left side for the CHD model, right side for the CHB model with $ \eta = 10^{-5} $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 6. Influence of different mobilities: Tumour at time $ t = 9 $ for $ \eta = 10^{-5} $, $ \beta = 0.1 $ and $ \alpha = \rho_S = 2 $, but with different mobilities, left $ m(\varphi) = \frac{1}{2}(1+\varphi)^2 $, middle $ m(\varphi) = \epsilon $, right $ m(\varphi) = 10^{-3}\epsilon $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 7. Influence of the adhesion parameter $ \beta $: Evolution of the tumour with $ m(\varphi) = \tfrac{1}{2}(1+\varphi)^2 $ and $ \eta = 0.1 $, above for $ \beta = 0.1 $ at time $ t = 1, 3, 6, 10 $, below for $ \beta = 0.01 $ at time $ t = 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 8. Influence of viscosiy I: Tumour and velocity for $ \beta = 0.01 $ at time $ t = 2.5 $, left for $ \eta = 0.1 $, right for $ \eta = 100 $, on top the tumour and below the velocity magnitude

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 9. Influence of viscosity II: Evolution of the tumour at time $ t = 1, 3, 6, 10 $ with $ \beta = 0.1 $, $ \nu = 0 $ and a no-slip boundary condition on the left boundary, on top for $ \eta = 0.1 $ and below for $ \eta = 10 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 10. Velocity profiles for different viscosities: The velocity magnitude at time $ t = 10 $ with $ \beta = 0.1 $, $ \nu = 0 $ and a no-slip boundary condition on the left boundary, left for $ \eta = 0.1 $, right for $ \eta = 10 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 11. Influence of viscosity contrast: Tumour at time $ t = 10 $ with $ \beta = 0.1 $, $ \nu = 0 $ and a no-slip b. c. on the left boundary, with $ \eta_- = 0.01 $, $ \eta_+ = 1 $; $ \eta_- = 1 $, $ \eta_+ = 0.01 $; $ \eta_- = 0.01 $, $ \eta_+ = 10 $; $ \eta_- = 10 $, $ \eta_+ = 0.01 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 12. Influence of initial profile I: Tumour at time $ t = 0, 0.3, 1, 1.6 $ with $ \eta = 100 $ and with the initial profile corresponding to $ r_1 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 13. Influence of initial profile II: Tumour at time $ t = 0, 0.7, 1.2, 2.6 $ with $ \eta = 100 $ and with the initial profile corresponding to $ r_2 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 14. Influence of initial profile III: Tumour at time $ t = 0, 0.5, 1.2, 2.4 $ with $ \eta = 100 $ and with the initial profile corresponding to $ r_3 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Figure 15. Influence of initial profile IV: Tumour at time $ t = 0, 0.3, 1.3, 2.3 $ with $ \eta = 0.01 $ and with the initial profile corresponding to $ r_4 $

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

[1]	Andrea Signori. Penalisation of long treatment time and optimal control of a tumour growth model of Cahn–Hilliard type with singular potential. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2021, 41 (6) : 2519-2542. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020373
[2]	Murat Uzunca, Ayşe Sarıaydın-Filibelioǧlu. Adaptive discontinuous galerkin finite elements for advective Allen-Cahn equation. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (2) : 269-281. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020025
[3]	Michael Grinfeld, Amy Novick-Cohen. Some remarks on stability for a phase field model with memory. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2006, 15 (4) : 1089-1117. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2006.15.1089
[4]	Lu Li. On a coupled Cahn–Hilliard/Cahn–Hilliard model for the proliferative-to-invasive transition of hypoxic glioma cells. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2021032
[5]	Seung-Yeal Ha, Jinwook Jung, Jeongho Kim, Jinyeong Park, Xiongtao Zhang. A mean-field limit of the particle swarmalator model. Kinetic & Related Models, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/krm.2021011
[6]	Amanda E. Diegel. A C0 interior penalty method for the Cahn-Hilliard equation. Electronic Research Archive, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/era.2021030
[7]	Didier Bresch, Thierry Colin, Emmanuel Grenier, Benjamin Ribba, Olivier Saut. A viscoelastic model for avascular tumor growth. Conference Publications, 2009, 2009 (Special) : 101-108. doi: 10.3934/proc.2009.2009.101
[8]	Chin-Chin Wu. Existence of traveling wavefront for discrete bistable competition model. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2011, 16 (3) : 973-984. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2011.16.973
[9]	Yuncherl Choi, Taeyoung Ha, Jongmin Han, Sewoong Kim, Doo Seok Lee. Turing instability and dynamic phase transition for the Brusselator model with multiple critical eigenvalues. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2021 doi: 10.3934/dcds.2021035
[10]	Yuta Ishii, Kazuhiro Kurata. Existence of multi-peak solutions to the Schnakenberg model with heterogeneity on metric graphs. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2021035
[11]	Marco Cirant, Diogo A. Gomes, Edgard A. Pimentel, Héctor Sánchez-Morgado. On some singular mean-field games. Journal of Dynamics & Games, 2021 doi: 10.3934/jdg.2021006
[12]	G. Deugoué, B. Jidjou Moghomye, T. Tachim Medjo. Approximation of a stochastic two-phase flow model by a splitting-up method. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2021, 20 (3) : 1135-1170. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2021010
[13]	Elena Bonetti, Pierluigi Colli, Gianni Gilardi. Singular limit of an integrodifferential system related to the entropy balance. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2014, 19 (7) : 1935-1953. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2014.19.1935
[14]	De-han Chen, Daijun jiang. Convergence rates of Tikhonov regularization for recovering growth rates in a Lotka-Volterra competition model with diffusion. Inverse Problems & Imaging, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2021023
[15]	Wenjing Liu, Rong Yang, Xin-Guang Yang. Dynamics of a 3D Brinkman-Forchheimer equation with infinite delay. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2021052
[16]	José Raúl Quintero, Juan Carlos Muñoz Grajales. On the existence and computation of periodic travelling waves for a 2D water wave model. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2018, 17 (2) : 557-578. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2018030
[17]	Miroslav Bulíček, Victoria Patel, Endre Süli, Yasemin Şengül. Existence of large-data global weak solutions to a model of a strain-limiting viscoelastic body. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2021053
[18]	Harumi Hattori, Aesha Lagha. Global existence and decay rates of the solutions for a chemotaxis system with Lotka-Volterra type model for chemoattractant and repellent. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2021 doi: 10.3934/dcds.2021071
[19]	Kamel Hamdache, Djamila Hamroun. Macroscopic limit of the kinetic Bloch equation. Kinetic & Related Models, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/krm.2021015
[20]	Vladimir Georgiev, Sandra Lucente. Focusing nlkg equation with singular potential. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2018, 17 (4) : 1387-1406. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2018068

2019 Impact Factor: 1.233

Tools

Metrics

Other articles
by authors

on AIMS
Matthias Ebenbeck Harald Garcke Robert Nürnberg
on Google Scholar
Matthias Ebenbeck Harald Garcke Robert Nürnberg

2019 Impact Factor: 1.233

Tools

Article outline

Figures and Tables

2019 Impact Factor: 1.233

Tools

Figures and Tables

2019 Impact Factor: 1.233

Tools

Metrics

Other articles
by authors

on AIMS
Matthias Ebenbeck Harald Garcke Robert Nürnberg
on Google Scholar
Matthias Ebenbeck Harald Garcke Robert Nürnberg

[Back to Top]