\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}
\usepackage{hyperref}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
\emph{Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2010(2010), No. 03, pp. 1--18.\newline
ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.edu or
http://ejde.math.unt.edu
\newline ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu}
\thanks{\copyright 2010 Texas State University - San Marcos.}
\vspace{9mm}}

\begin{document}
\title[\hfilneg EJDE-2010/03\hfil A parabolic-hyperbolic free boundary problem]
{A parabolic-hyperbolic free boundary problem modeling tumor growth
with drug application}

\author[J.-H. Zhao\hfil EJDE-2010/03\hfilneg]
{Ji-Hong Zhao}

\address{Ji-Hong Zhao \newline
School of Mathematics and Computional Science,
Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510275, China}
\email{zhaojihong2007@yahoo.com.cn}

\thanks{Submitted August 10, 2009. Published January 6, 2010.}
\thanks{Supported by grant 10771223 from China National Natural
Science Foundation}
\subjclass[2000]{35Q80, 35L45, 35R05}
\keywords{Parabolic-hyperbolic equations;
free boundary problem; \hfill\break\indent
tumor growth; global solution}

\begin{abstract}
 In this article, we study a free boundary problem modeling the
 growth of tumors with drug application. The model consists
 of two nonlinear second-order parabolic equations describing
 the diffusion of nutrient and drug concentration,
 and three nonlinear first-order hyperbolic equations describing
 the evolution of proliferative cells, quiescent cells and
 dead cells. We deal with the radially symmetric case of this free
 boundary problem, and prove that it has a unique global solution.
 The proof is based on the $L^p$ theory of parabolic equations,
 the characteristic theory of hyperbolic equations and the Banach
 fixed point theorem.
\end{abstract}


\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}
\allowdisplaybreaks


\section{Introduction}

In this article we study a free boundary problem modeling the tumor
growth with drug application, the mathematical model which neglect
the drug application was proposed by A. Friedman (cf. \cite{F04}) in
2004. This model consists of three types of cells: proliferative
cells; quiescent cells and dead cells, which we denote the
corresponding cell densities by $P$, $Q$ and $D$, respectively. $C$
and $W$ represent the concentration of nutrient and drug,
respectively. We assume $K_{B}(C)$ is the mitosis rate of
proliferative cells when the nutrient supply is at the level $C$,
$K_{A}(C)$ and $K_{D}(C)$ are death rates of proliferative cells
(apoptosis) and quiescent cells (necrosis), respectively, $K_{P}(C)$
and $K_{Q}(C)$  are the transferring rate of quiescent cells to
proliferative cells and the transferring rate of proliferative cells
to quiescent cells, respectively, $K_{R}$ denotes the constant rate
of dead cells are removed from the tumor.


Fick's law is assumed to describe the diffusion of the nutrient, for
reasons stated in \cite{WK97, WK98}, the nutrient is consumed at a
rate proportional to the rate of cell mitosis, i.e.,
$(\kappa_{1}K_{P}(C)P+\kappa_{2}K_{Q}(C)Q)C$. Hence, $C$ satisfies
the following equation:
\begin{gather}\label{eq1}
\frac{\partial C}{\partial t}=D_{1}\Delta
C-\Big(\kappa_{1}K_{P}(C)P+\kappa_{2}K_{Q}(C)Q\Big)C
\quad \text{in } \Omega(t), \\
\label{eq2} C(x,t)=\bar{C}\quad  \text{on} \quad
\partial\Omega(t),\quad C(x,0)=C_{0}(x)\quad \text{in } \Omega(0),
\end{gather}
where $\Omega(t)$ represents the tumor domain at time $t$, $D_{1}$
is the diffusion coefficient of nutrient which is supposed to be a
positive constant, $\kappa_{1}$ and $\kappa_{2}$ are two positive
constants, $\bar{C}$ is a positive constant reflecting the constant
nutrient supply that the tumor receives from its host tissue or the
solution in which it is cultivated.

Fick's law is also assumed to describe the diffusion of the drug, we
assume $(\mu_{1}G_{1}(W)P+\mu_{2}G_{2}(W)Q)W$ is the drug
consumption rate function, $\mu_{1}$, $\mu_{2}$ are two positive
constants can be viewed as a measure of the drug effectiveness.
Hence, $W$ satisfies
\begin{gather}\label{eq3}
\frac{\partial W}{\partial t}=D_{2}\Delta
W-\Big(\mu_{1}G_{1}(W)P+\mu_{2}G_{2}(W)Q\Big)W \quad\text{in }
\Omega(t), \\
\label{eq4} W(x,t)=\bar{W}\quad\text{on }
\partial\Omega(t),\quad W(x,0)=W_{0}(x)\quad\text{in }\Omega(0),
\end{gather}
where $D_{2}$ is the diffusion coefficient of drug which is supposed
to be a positive constant, $\bar{W}$ is a positive constant
reflecting the constant drug supply that the tumor receives from its
boundary.

 Due to the proliferation and removal of cells, there is a
continuous motion of cells within the tumor, we denote this movement
by the velocity fields $\vec{v}$. We shall assume that the tumor
tissue is a porous medium so that by Darcy's law, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq5}
\vec{v}=-\nabla \sigma \quad\text{in } \Omega(t),\;  t>0,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma$ is the pressure in the tumor.

We also assume that all cells to be mixed together in the tumor
which have the same size, and the tumor is uniformly packed with
cells, so that
\begin{equation}\label{eq6}
P+Q+D=N \quad\text{in } \Omega(t),\; t>0,
\end{equation}
where $N$ is a total number of cells per unit volume.

The mass conservation law for the densities of the proliferative
cells, quiescent cells and dead cells in $\Omega(t)$ take the
following form:
\begin{gather}\label{eq7}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial P}{\partial t}+
\mathop{\rm div}(P\vec{v})
=[K_{B}(C)-K_{Q}(C)-K_{A}(C)]P+K_{P}(C)Q-\iota_{1}G_{1}(W)P\\
\text{in }  \Omega(t),\; t>0,
\end{gathered}\\
\label{eq8}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial Q}{\partial t}+
\mathop{\rm div}(Q\vec{v})=K_{Q}(C)P-[K_{P}(C)+K_{D}(C)]Q
-\iota_{2}G_{2}(W)Q\\
\text{in } \Omega(t),\; t>0,
\end{gathered}\\
\label{eq9}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial D}{\partial t}+
\mathop{\rm div}(D\vec{v})=K_{A}(C)P+K_{D}(C)Q-K_{R}D
+\iota_{1}G_{1}(W)P+\iota_{2}G_{2}(W)Q\\
\text{in } \Omega(t),\; t>0,
\end{gathered}
\end{gather}
where $\iota_{1}G_{1}(W)$ is a rate of the proliferative cells become
dead cells due to the drug, $\iota_{2}G_{2}(W)$ is a rate of the
quiescent cells become dead cells due to the drug, the positive
constant $\iota_{1}$ and $\iota_{2}$ are the maximum possible rate of
drug induced proliferative cells and quiescent cells dead,
respectively.

We take the boundary conditions for $\sigma$ to be
\begin{gather}\label{eq10}
\sigma=\theta \kappa \quad \text{on } \partial\Omega(t),\; t>0, \\
\label{eq11} \frac{\partial\sigma}{\partial n}=-V_{n}\quad
\text{on } \partial\Omega(t),\; t>0,
\end{gather}
and the initial data
\begin{equation} \label{eq12}
P(x,0)=P_{0}(x),\quad Q(x,0)=Q_{0}(x),\quad D(x,0)=D_{0}(x)\quad
\text{for } x\in\Omega(0),
\end{equation}
where $\Omega(0)$ is given, $\theta$ is the surface tension,
$\kappa$ is the mean curvature of the tumor surface,
$\frac{\partial}{\partial n}$ is the derivatives in the direction
$n$ of the outward normal, and $V_{n}$ is the velocity of the free
boundary $\partial\Omega(t)$ in the direction $n$. Equation
\eqref{eq10} is based on the assumption that the pressure $\sigma$
on the surface of the tumor is proportional to the surface tension
(cf. Greenspan \cite{G72, G76}), and \eqref{eq11} is a standard
kinetic condition.

The model \eqref{eq1}--\eqref{eq12} without drug application was
proposed by A. Friedman (cf. \cite{F04}) in 2004. In \cite{CW05},
the authors studied this model, under the case of where the initial
data and the solution are spherically symmetric, they proved that
there exists a unique global solution. However, for three
dimensional model \eqref{eq1}--\eqref{eq12}, as to our knowledge,
the global existence is still an open problem. In \cite{CHF03},
based on the well-known theory of Hele-Shaw problem, the authors
proved the local existence and uniqueness of solution to the system
\eqref{eq1}--\eqref{eq12} without drug application.

There are many mathematical tumor models involving drug therapies
(cf. \cite{J02,JB00,TC06,WC07,WK03}). We know the drug can penetrate
tumor tissue mainly by the mechanism of diffusion. In \cite{WK03},
the authors advanced the model which only considered living cells
and dead cells with drug application, under the condition of
spherical symmetry of the solution. In \cite{TC06, WC07}, the
authors proved that there exists a unique global solution of the
model in \cite{WK03}. Since the living cells include the
proliferative cells and quiescent cells, the model in this article
is more reasonable than that of \cite{WK03}. Some other tumor models
and rigorous mathematical analysis of these models we refer the
reader to see \cite{BC95}--\cite{CUFr03}, \cite{F06}--\cite{FH07},
\cite{PPTM01} and \cite{WK97}--\cite{WK03}, and the references there
in.

In this article, we consider the drug application, also spherically
symmetric solution for the system \eqref{eq1}--\eqref{eq12}. It is
clear that, under the condition of spherical symmetry, for given
$\vec{v}$ and $R(t)$, $\sigma$ can easily solved from \eqref{eq5}
and \eqref{eq10}. The major difficulty lies in that there is a clear
coupling between the evolution of the cells and the nutrient (drug)
diffusion-consumption process. By applying the $L^{p}$ theory of
parabolic equations, the characteristic theory of hyperbolic
equations and the Banach fixed point theorem, we prove that there
exists a unique global solution of \eqref{eq1}--\eqref{eq12}.

It is obvious that if we make an addition to
\eqref{eq7}--\eqref{eq9}, then we can get the following equation for
$\vec{v}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq13}
\mathop{\rm div}(\vec{v})=\frac{1}{N}[K_{B}(C)P-K_{R}D]
\quad\text{for }  x\in\Omega(t),\; t>0.
\end{equation}
Conversely, from \eqref{eq13} and Eqs. \eqref{eq7}--\eqref{eq9} we
have
\begin{equation}\label{eq14}
\frac{\partial(P+Q+D)}{\partial t}+\vec{v}
\nabla(P+Q+D)=\frac{1}{N}[K_{B}(C)P-K_{R}D][N-(P+Q+D)]
\end{equation}
for $x\in\Omega(t)$, $t>0$. By uniqueness, we can deduce that
\eqref{eq6} is equivalent to \eqref{eq13}, later on we shall use
\eqref{eq13} instead of \eqref{eq6}.

The model \eqref{eq1}--\eqref{eq12} is a three-dimensional tumor
model, in this article we consider the well-posedness of this
problem under the case where the initial data and the solution are
spherically symmetric. Hence, we assume that $C$, $W$, $P$, $Q$ and
$D$ are spherical symmetric in the space variable, let $r=|x|$ we
denote
$$
C=C(r,t),\quad  W=W(r,t),\quad  P=P(r,t),\quad Q=Q(r,t), \quad
D=D(r,t)
$$
for $0\leq r\leq R(t)$, $t\geq0$, and
$$
C_{0}=C_{0}(r),\quad  W_{0}=W_{0}(r),\quad P_{0}=P_{0}(r),\quad
Q_{0}=Q_{0}(r),\quad  D_{0}=D_{0}(r)
$$
for $0\leq r\leq R_{0}=R(0)$. We also assume that there is a scalar
function $v=v(r,t)$ such that $\vec{v}=v(r,t)\frac{x}{r}$. Since
$\sigma$ is spherically symmetric in the space variable, as we
mentioned before, we could eliminate the pressure $\sigma$ and
derive the model \eqref{eq1}--\eqref{eq12} as follows:
\begin{gather}\label{eq15}
 \frac{\partial C}{\partial t}=D_{1}\frac{1}{r^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(r^{2}\frac{\partial C}{\partial
r})-F(C, P, Q)C \quad\text{for }\ 0<r<R(t),\; t>0, \\
\label{eq16} \frac{\partial C}{\partial r}(r,t)=0 \quad \text{at }
r=0, \quad
 C(r,t)=\bar{C}\quad \text{at }\ r=R(t)\text{ for } t>0, \\
\label{eq17}
C(r,0)=C_{0}(r)\quad\text{for }  0\leq r\leq R_{0}, \\
\label{eq18} \frac{\partial W}{\partial
t}=D_{2}\frac{1}{r^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial
r}(r^{2}\frac{\partial W}{\partial r})-G(W,P,Q)W \quad\text{for }
0<r<R(t),\;  t>0, \\
\label{eq19} \frac{\partial W}{\partial r}(r,t)=0 \quad \text{at }
r=0, \quad
W(r,t)=\bar{W}\quad\text{at } r=R(t)\text{ for }  t>0, \\
\label{eq20}
W(r,0)=W_{0}(r)\quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R_{0}, \\
\label{eq21}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial P}{\partial t}+v\frac{\partial P}{\partial
r}&=g_{11}(C,W,P,Q,D)P+g_{12}(C,W,P,Q,D)Q  \\
&\quad+g_{13}(C,W,P,Q,D)D\quad\text{for }  0\le r\le R(t),\; t>0,
\end{aligned} \\
\label{eq22}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial Q}{\partial t}+v\frac{\partial Q}{\partial
r}&=g_{21}(C,W,P,Q,D)P+g_{22}(C,W,P,Q,D)Q \\
&\quad+g_{23}(C,W,P,Q,D)D \quad\text{for }  0\le r\le R(t),\; t>0,
\end{aligned} \\
\label{eq23}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial D}{\partial t}+v\frac{\partial D}{\partial
r}&=g_{31}(C,W,P,Q,D)P+g_{32}(C,W,P,Q,D)Q \\
&\quad +g_{33}(C,W,P,Q,D)D \quad\text{for } 0\le r\le R(t), \;
t>0,
\end{aligned} \\
\label{eq24}
\frac{1}{r^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial
r}(r^{2}v)=h(C,W,P,Q,D)\quad\text{for } 0<r\le R(t),\; t>0, \\
\label{eq25}
v(0,t)=0 \quad\text{for }  t>0, \\
\label{eq26}
\frac{dR(t)}{dt}=v(R(t),t) \quad\text{for }  t>0, \\
\label{eq27}
\begin{gathered}
P(r,0)=P_{0}(r), \quad Q(r,0)=Q_{0}(r),\quad
D(r,0)=D_{0}(r)\quad \text{for } 0\leq r\leq R_{0},\\
R(0)=R_{0}\quad \text{is prescribed},
\end{gathered}
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather*}
F(C, P,Q)=\kappa_{1}K_{P}(C)P+\kappa_{2}K_{Q}(C)Q,\\
G(W,P,Q)=\mu_{1}G_{1}(W)P+\mu_{2}G_{2}(W)Q, \\
\begin{aligned}
&g_{11}(C,W,P,Q,D)\\
&=[K_{B}(C)-K_{Q}(C)-K_{A}(C)-\iota_{1}G_{1}(W)]
 -\frac{1}{N}[K_{B}(C)P-K_{R}D],
\end{aligned} \\
g_{12}(C,W,P,Q,D)=K_{P}(C), \\
g_{13}(C,W,P,Q,D)=0, \\
g_{21}(C,W,P,Q,D)=K_{Q}(C), \\
g_{22}(C,W,P,Q,D)=-[K_{P}(C)+K_{D}(C)+\iota_{2}G_{2}(W)]
 -\frac{1}{N}[K_{B}(C)P-K_{R}D], \\
g_{23}(C,W,P,Q,D)=0, \\
g_{31}(C,W,P,Q,D)=K_{A}(C)+\iota_{1}G_{1}(W), \\
g_{32}(C,W,P,Q,D)=K_{D}(C)+\iota_{2}G_{2}(W), \\
g_{33}(C,W,P,Q,D)=-K_{R}-\frac{1}{N}[K_{B}(C)P-K_{R}D], \\
h(C,W,P,Q,D)=\frac{1}{N}[K_{B}(C)P-K_{R}D].
\end{gather*}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk1.1} \rm
The following facts will play an important role in our subsequent
analysis:
\begin{gather}\label{eq28}
g_{ij}(C,W,P,Q,D)\geq 0 \quad\text{for }  i\neq j, \\
\label{eq29}
\begin{aligned}
&\sum^{3}_{i=1}g_{i1}(C,W,P,Q,D)P+g_{i2}(C,W,P,Q,D)Q+g_{i3}(C,W,P,Q,D)D \\
&=h(C,W,P,Q,D)[N-(P+Q+D)].
\end{aligned}
\end{gather}
\end{remark}


Throughout the whole article we make use of  the following
notations:


\noindent(i) Given an open set $\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^{3}$, we denote
$W^{2,p}(\Omega):=\{u : D^{\alpha}u \in L^{p}(\Omega),
0\leq|\alpha|\leq 2\}$ is the usual Sobolev space with norm
$\|u\|_{W^{2,p}(\Omega)}=\sum_{0\leq|\alpha|\leq 2}
\|D^{\alpha}u\|_{L^{p}(\Omega)}$, where $1\leq p\leq \infty$.


\noindent(ii) For $T>0$, given a positive continuous function
$R=R(t)\ (0\leq t\leq T)$, we denote $Q^{R}_{T}=\{(x,t)\in
\mathbb{R}^{3}\times\mathbb{R}: |x|<R(t),\ 0<t<T\}$ and
$\overline{Q^{R}_{T}}$ denotes the closure of $Q^{R}_{T}$.


\noindent(iii) For $R=R(t)$ as in (ii) and $1\leq p<\infty$, we
denote by $W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})$ the usual non-isotropic Sobolev
spaces on the parabolic domain $Q^{R}_{T}$, i.e.,
$$
W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})=\{u\in L^{p}(Q^{R}_{T}):\
\partial_{x}^{\alpha}\partial_{t}^{k}u \in L^{p}(Q^{R}_{T})\quad
\text{for } |\alpha|+2k\leq 2\},
$$
with the norm
$$
\|u\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}=\sum_{|\alpha|+2k\leq2}
\|\partial_{x}^{\alpha}\partial_{t}^{k}u\|_{L^{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}.
$$


\noindent(iv) Given an open set $\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^{3}$ and
for some number $p>5/2$, we denote by $D_{p}(\Omega)$ the trace
space of $W^{2,1}_{p}(\Omega\times(0,T))$ at $t=0$, i.e.,
$\varphi\in D_{p}(\Omega)$ if and only if there exists $u\in
W^{2,1}_{p}(\Omega\times(0,T))$ such that $u(\cdot,0)=\varphi$. The
norm equipped in $D_{p}(\Omega)$ is defined as follows:
$$
\|\varphi\|_{D_{p}(\Omega)}=\inf\{T^{-\frac{1}{p}}
\|u\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(\Omega\times(0,T))}:  u\in
W^{2,1}_{p}(\Omega\times(0,T)),\; u(\cdot,0)=\varphi\}.
$$
It is well known that if $p>5/2$, then
$W^{2,1}_{p}(\Omega\times(0,T))\subset
C(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,T])$ is continuous by the embedding
theorem (see \cite{LSU68}). Furthermore, if $\varphi\in
W^{2,p}(\Omega)$, then $\varphi\in D_{p}(\Omega)$ and
$\|\varphi\|_{D_{p}(\Omega)}\leq\|\varphi\|_{W^{2,p}(\Omega)}$ since
we can take $u(x,t)\equiv \varphi(x)$ for all $0\leq t\leq T$.

Since the functional dependence of $K_{A}(C)$, $K_{B}(C)$,
$K_{D}(C)$, $K_{P}(C)$ and $K_{Q}(C)$ with respect to $C$ and
$G_{1}(W)$, $G_{2}(W)$ with respect to $W$ are not critical to our
results, we only need a very simple assumption as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A1)] $K_{A}(C)$, $K_{B}(C)$, $K_{D}(C)$, $K_{P}(C)$ and
 $K_{Q}(C)$ are non-negative $C^{1}$-smooth functions;

\item[(A2)] $G_{1}(W)$ and $G_{2}(W)$ are  non-negative $C^{1}$-smooth functions;

\item[(A3)] $P_{0}$, $Q_{0}$ and $D_{0}$ are  non-negative $C^{1}$-smooth functions on $[0,R_{0}]$;

\item[(A4)] $C_{0}(|x|)$, $W_{0}(|x|)\in D_{p}(B_{R_{0}})$ for some
$p>5$, where $B_{R_{0}}=\{x\in \mathbb{R}^{3}:\ |x|\leq R_{0}\}$.
\end{itemize}
The first three conditions are clearly very natural from biological
point of view.


We also assume that the initial data satisfy the following
compatible conditions:
\begin{equation}\label{eq30}
\begin{gathered}
0\leq C_{0}(r)\leq \bar{C},\quad
0\leq W_{0}(r)\leq \bar{W}\quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R_{0},\\
C'_{0}(0)=0, \quad  C_{0}(R_{0})=\bar{C},\quad
W'_{0}(0)=0,\quad W_{0}(R_{0})=\bar{W},\\
P_{0}(r)\geq 0, \quad  Q_{0}(r)\geq 0,\quad
D_{0}(r)\geq 0 \quad\text{for }0\leq r\leq R_{0},\\
P_{0}(r)+Q_{0}(r)+D_{0}(r)=N \quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R_{0}.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}

\begin{remark} \label{rmk1.2} \rm
 Under the assumptions (A1)--(A4),
we can easily deduce the following facts:
\begin{itemize}
\item %(1.1)
$F\geq 0$,  $G\geq 0$.
\item% (1.2)
$F$, $G$ and $h$ are $C^1$-functions.
\item %(1.3)
$g_{ij}$ $(i,j=1,2,3)$ are $C^1$-functions.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
Now we give our main results.

\begin{theorem}\label{Th1.1}
Under the assumptions {\rm (A1)--(A4)} and initial condition
\eqref{eq30}, the free boundary problem \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27}
has a unique solution $(R, C, W, P, Q, D)$ for all $t\geq0$. In
addition, for any $T>0$, $R(t)\in C^{1}[0,T]$, $C$, $W\in
W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})$ and $P$, $Q$, $D\in C^{1}(Q^{R}_{T})$.
Furthermore, the following estimates hold:
\begin{equation}\label{eq31}
\begin{gathered}
R(t)>0 \quad\text{for } t>0, \\
0< C(r,t)\leq \bar{C}, \quad  0< W(r,t)\leq \bar{W}
\quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R(t),\; t\geq0,\\
P(r,t)\geq 0, \quad  Q(r,t)\geq 0,\quad  D(r,t)\geq 0
 \quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R(t), \; t\geq0,\\
P(r,t)+Q(r,t)+D(r,t)=N \quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R(t),\;
t\geq0.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

This article is organized as follows. In Section 2, we transform the
problem \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} for a moving domain into an
equivalent one which defined on a fixed domain. Section 3 is devoted
to presenting some preliminary lemmas that will be used in the later
analysis. In section 4 we prove local existence and uniqueness of
the transformed problem by applying Banach fixed point theorem. We
prove Theorem \ref{Th1.1} in Section 5.


\section{Reformulation of the problem}

To transform the varying domain $\{(x, t):\ |x|=r<R(t),\ t\ge0\}$
into a fixed domain, let we assume $(R, C, W, P, Q, D)$ is a
solution of \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} and $R(t)>0$ ($t\geq0$), and
make the following change of variables,
\begin{equation}\label{eq32}
\begin{gathered}
\rho=\frac{r}{R(t)},\quad
\tau=\int^{t}_{0}\frac{ds}{R^{2}(s)},\quad
\eta(\tau)=R(t),\quad
c(\rho,\tau)=C(r,t),\quad
w(\rho,\tau)=W(r,t),\\
p(\rho,\tau)=P(r,t),\quad
q(\rho,\tau)=Q(r,t),\quad
d(\rho,\tau)=D(r,t),\quad
u(\rho,\tau)=R(t)v(r,t),
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
then the free boundary problem \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} is
transformed into the following initial-boundary value problem on the
fixed domain $\{(\rho,\tau):0\leq\rho\leq1,\ \tau\geq 0\}$:
\begin{gather}\label{eq33}
 \frac{\partial c}{\partial \tau}
=D_{1}\frac{1}{\rho^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial \rho}(\rho^{2}
\frac{\partial c}{\partial \rho})+u(1,\tau)\rho\frac{\partial
c}{\partial\rho}-\eta^{2}f(c,p,q)c\quad\text{for }0<\rho<1, \;\tau>0, \\
 \label{eq34}
\frac{\partial c}{\partial \rho}(0,\tau)=0,\quad
c(1,\tau)=\bar{c}\quad\text{for }\tau>0, \\
\label{eq35}
c(\rho,0)=c_{0}(\rho)\quad\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1, \\
\label{eq36}
\begin{gathered}
 \frac{\partial w}{\partial \tau}=D_{2}\frac{1}{\rho^{2}}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \rho}(\rho^{2}\frac{\partial w}{\partial
\rho})+u(1,\tau)\rho\frac{\partial
w}{\partial\rho}-\eta^{2}g(w,p,q)w\\
 \text{for }0<\rho<1,\; \tau>0,
\end{gathered}\\
\label{eq37} \frac{\partial w}{\partial \rho}(0,\tau)=0,\quad
w(1,\tau)=\bar{w}\quad\text{for }\tau>0, \\
\label{eq38}
w(\rho,0)=w_{0}(\rho)\quad\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1, \\
\label{eq39}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial p}{\partial \tau}
+\nu\frac{\partial p}{\partial\rho}
=\eta^{2}[g_{11}(c,w,p,q,d)p+g_{12}(c,w,p,q,d)q+g_{13}(c,w,p,q,d)d]\\
\text{for }0\le\rho\le1, \tau>0,
\end{gathered}\\
\label{eq40}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial q}{\partial \tau}+\nu\frac{\partial
q}{\partial\rho}=\eta^{2}[g_{21}(c,w,p,q,d)p+g_{22}(c,w,p,q,d)q
+g_{23}(c,w,p,q,d)d]\\
\text{for }  0\le\rho\le1, \tau>0,
\end{gathered}\\
\label{eq41}
\begin{gathered}
 \frac{\partial d}{\partial \tau}+\nu\frac{\partial d}{\partial\rho}
 =\eta^{2}[g_{31}(c,w,p,q,d)p+g_{32}(c,w,p,q,d)q+g_{33}(c,w,p,q,d)d]\\
\text{for }0\le\rho\le1, \tau>0,
\end{gathered}\\
\label{eq42}
 \nu(\rho,\tau)=u(\rho,\tau)-\rho u(1,\tau) \quad\text{for }0\le\rho\le1,\;
\tau>0, \\
\label{eq43}
\frac{1}{\rho^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\rho}(\rho^{2}u)
=\eta^{2}(\tau)h(c,w, p,q,d)\quad\text{for }0<\rho\le1,\; \tau>0, \\
\label{eq44}
u(0,\tau)=0 \quad\text{for }\tau>0,\\
\label{eq45} \frac{d\eta(\tau)}{d\tau}=\eta(\tau)u(1,\tau)\quad
\text{for }\tau>0, \\
\label{eq46}
p(\rho,0)=p_{0}(\rho),\quad q(\rho,0)=q_{0}(\rho),\quad
d(\rho,0)=d_{0}(\rho) \quad\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1, \\
\label{eq47}
\eta(0)=\eta_{0},
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather*}\label{eq48}
f(c,p,q)=F(c,p,q),\quad g(w,p,q)=G(w,p,q), \\
\label{eq49}
\begin{gathered}
\bar{c}=\bar{C},\quad  \bar{w}=\bar{W},\quad
c_{0}(\rho)=C_{0}(\rho R_{0}), \quad
w_{0}(\rho)=W_{0}(\rho R_{0}), \\
p_{0}(\rho)=P_{0}(\rho R_{0}),\quad
q_{0}(\rho)=Q_{0}(\rho R_{0}),\quad
d_{0}(\rho)=D_{0}(\rho R_{0}),\\
\eta_{0}=R_{0}.
\end{gathered}
\end{gather*}
Conversely, if $(\eta, c, w, p, q, d, u)$ is a solution of
\eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47} such that $\eta(\tau)>0$ for $\tau\geq
0$, then by making the change of variables
\begin{equation}\label{eq50}
\begin{gathered}
r=\rho\eta(\tau),\quad t=\int^{\tau}_{0}\eta^{2}(s)ds,\quad
R(t)=\eta(\tau),\quad C(r,t)=c(\rho,\tau),\\
W(r,t)=w(\rho,\tau),\quad
P(r,t)=p(\rho,\tau),\quad Q(r,t)=q(\rho,\tau),\\
D(r,t)=d(\rho,\tau),\quad v(r,t)=\frac{u(\rho,\tau)}{\eta(\tau)}.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
One can easily verify that $(R, C, W, P, Q, D, v)$ is a solution to
\eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27}. Hence, we summarize the above result in
the following lemma.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem2.1}
Under the change of variables \eqref{eq32} or its inverse
\eqref{eq50}, the free boundary problem \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27}
is equivalent to the initial-boundary value problem
\eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47}.
\end{lemma}


\begin{remark} \label{rmk2.1} \rm
Note that from the \eqref{eq43}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq51}
u(\rho,\tau)=\frac{\eta^{2}(\tau)}{\rho^{2}}\int^{\rho}_{0}
h(c(s,\tau),w(s,\tau),p(s,\tau),q(s,\tau),d(s,\tau))s^{2}ds.
\end{equation}
Then, using \eqref{eq45} and \eqref{eq51} we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq52}
\frac{d\eta(\tau)}{d\tau}=\eta^{3}(\tau)
\int^{1}_{0}h(c(s,\tau),w(s,\tau),p(s,\tau),q(s,\tau),d(s,\tau))s^{2}ds.
\end{equation}
At first glance, we can not expect the solution of
\eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47} exists for all $\tau\geq0$, but since we
make the change of variables $t=\int^{\tau}_{0}\eta^{2}(s)ds$ and
$\tau=\int^{t}_{0}\frac{ds}{R^{2}(s)}$, we can prove the solution of
\eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47} exists actually for all $\tau\geq0$.
\end{remark}


\section{Preliminary Lemmas}

In this section we present some preliminary lemmas which can be
found in \cite{CW05}. Let
$Q_{T}=\{(x,\tau)\in\mathbb{R}^{3}\times\mathbb{R}:\ |x|<1,\ 0<\tau<
T\}$ and $\bar{Q}_{T}$ denotes the closure of $Q_{T}$. For a
vector-valued function $(p, q, d)$ we denote
$$
\|(p, q, d)\|_{L^{\infty}}=(\|p\|_{L^{\infty}}^{2}
+\|q\|_{L^{\infty}}^{2}+\|d\|_{L^{\infty}}^{2})^{\frac{1}{2}}.
$$
Without confusion we do not point out the explicit domain in the
$L^\infty$-norm in the whole article.

\begin{lemma}\label{lem3.1}
Let $\phi(\tau)$, $\varphi(\rho,\tau)$ and $\psi(\rho,\tau)$ be
bounded continuous functions on $[0,T]$ and $[0,1]\times[0,T]\
(T>0)$, respectively. Let $\bar{\sigma}$ be a constant, and
$\sigma_{0}$ be a function on $[0,1]$ such that $\sigma_{0}(|x|)\in
D_{p}(B_{1})$ for some $p>\frac{5}{2}$, where $B_{1}$ denotes the
unit ball in $\mathbb{R}^{3}$. Then the initial value problem
\begin{gather}\label{eq53}
\begin{gathered}
 \frac{\partial \sigma}{\partial \tau}
 =\frac{1}{\rho^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial \rho}
 (\rho^{2}\frac{\partial \sigma}{\partial
\rho})+\phi(\tau)\rho\frac{\partial\sigma}{\partial\rho}
 +\varphi(\rho,\tau)\sigma+\psi(\sigma,\rho)\\
\text{for } 0<\rho<1,\; 0<\tau\leq T,
\end{gathered} \\
\label{eq54}
 \frac{\partial\sigma}{\partial\rho}(0,\tau)=0,\quad
 \sigma(1,\tau)=\bar{\sigma} \quad\text{for } 0<\tau\leq  T, \\
 \label{eq55}
\sigma(\rho,0)=\sigma_{0}(\rho)\quad\text{for } 0\leq\rho\leq1,
\end{gather}
has a unique solution $\sigma(\rho,\tau)$ such that
$\sigma(|x|,\tau)\in W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})$. Moreover, there exists a
positive constant $A$ depending only on $p$, $T$,
$\|\phi\|_{L^{\infty}}$ and $\|\varphi\|_{L^{\infty}}$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq56}
\|\sigma(|x|,\tau)\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})}\leq A(|\bar{\sigma}|+
\|\sigma_{0}(|x|)\|_{D_{p}(B_{1})}+\|\psi\|_{L^{p}}),
\end{equation}
where $A$ is bounded for $T$ in any bounded set. Furthermore, the
following estimate holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq57}
\|\sigma\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq \max \{|\bar{\sigma}|,
\|\sigma_{0}\|_{L^{\infty}}\}+Te^{A_{0}T}\|\psi\|_{L^{\infty}},
\end{equation}
where $A_{0}=0$ if $\varphi\leq 0$ and
$A_{0}=\max_{\overline{Q}_{T}} \varphi$ otherwise.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof of Lemma \ref{lem3.1} relies on the standard $L^p$ theory
for parabolic equations and maximum principle. See \cite{CW05} for
more details.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem3.2}
Assume that $\nu(\rho,\tau)$, $g_{ij}(\rho,\tau)$ $(i,j=1,2,3)$ and
$f_{i}(\rho,\tau)$ $(i=1,2,3)$ are bounded functions defined on
$[0,1]\times[0,T]$, $\nu(\rho,\tau)$ is continuously differentiable
with respect to $\rho$ and $\nu(0,\tau)=\nu(1,\tau)=0$. Then for any
$\alpha_{0}$, $\beta_{0}$, $\gamma_{0}\in C[0,1]$, the initial value
problem
\begin{gather}\label{eq58}
\begin{gathered}
 \frac{\partial \alpha}{\partial
 \tau}+\nu(\rho,\tau)\frac{\partial\alpha}{\partial\rho}
=g_{11}(\rho,\tau)\alpha+g_{12}(\rho,\tau)\beta+g_{13}(\rho,\tau)\gamma
+ f_{1}(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1,\quad 0<\tau\leq T,
\end{gathered}\\
 \label{eq59}
\begin{gathered} \frac{\partial \beta}{\partial
 \tau}+\nu(\rho,\tau)\frac{\partial\beta}{\partial\rho}
=g_{21}(\rho,\tau)\alpha+g_{22}(\rho,\tau)\beta+g_{23}(\rho,\tau)\gamma
+ f_{2}(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1,\quad  0<\tau\leq T,
\end{gathered}\\
 \label{eq60}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial \gamma}{\partial
 \tau}+\nu(\rho,\tau)\frac{\partial\gamma}{\partial\rho}
=g_{31}(\rho,\tau)\alpha+g_{32}(\rho,\tau)\beta+g_{33}(\rho,\tau)\gamma
+ f_{3}(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for } 0\leq\rho\leq1, \quad 0<\tau\leq T,
\end{gathered}\\
\label{eq61} \alpha(\rho,0)=\alpha_{0}(\rho),\quad
\beta(\rho,0)=\beta_{0}(\rho),\quad \gamma(\rho,0)=\gamma_{0}(\rho)
\quad\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1,
\end{gather}
has a unique weak solution $\alpha$, $\beta$,
$\gamma\in C([0,1]\times[0,T])$  and the following estimate holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq62}
\|(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq
e^{TA_{0}(T)}\Big(\|(\alpha_{0},\beta_{0},\gamma_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}}
+T\|(f_{1},f_{2},f_{3})\|_{L^{\infty}}\Big),
\end{equation}
where $A_{0}(T)=2\max\{\|g_{ij}\|_{L^{\infty}}:i,j=1,2,3\}$. If we
assume further that $g_{ij}(\rho,\tau)$ $(i,j=1,2,3)$ and
$f_{i}(\rho,\tau)$ $(i=1,2,3)$ are also continuously differentiable
with respect to $\rho$, and $\alpha_{0}$, $\beta_{0}$,
$\gamma_{0}\in C^{1}[0,1]$, then the weak solution of
\eqref{eq58}--\eqref{eq61} is a classical solution, and the
following estimate holds:
\begin{equation} \label{eq63}
\begin{aligned}
&\|(\frac{\partial\alpha}{\partial\rho},\frac{\partial\beta}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial\gamma}{\partial\rho})\|_{L^{\infty}} \\
&\leq e^{T(A(T)+A_{0}(T))}\Big(\|(\alpha'_{0},
 \beta'_{0},\gamma'_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}}
+TA_{1}(T)e^{TA(T)}\|(\alpha_{0},\beta_{0},\gamma_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}} \\
&\quad +Te^{TA(T)}\|(\frac{\partial
f_{1}}{\partial\rho},\frac{\partial
f_{2}}{\partial\rho},\frac{\partial
f_{3}}{\partial\rho})\|_{L^{\infty}}\Big),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $A_{0}(T)$ is as before, and
$$
A(T)=\|\frac{\partial\nu}{\partial\rho}\|_{L^{\infty}}, \quad
A_{1}(T)=\max\{\|\frac{\partial
g_{ij}}{\partial\rho}\|_{L^{\infty}}:\; i, j=1,2,3\}.
$$
If in addition, $g_{ij}\geq0$ for $i\neq j$, and
$$
\alpha_{0}(\rho)\geq0,\quad  \beta_{0}(\rho)\geq0, \quad
\gamma_{0}(\rho)\geq0, \quad  f_{i}(\rho,\tau)\geq0\; (i=1,2,3),
$$
then we have
$$
\alpha(\rho,\tau)\geq0,\quad \beta(\rho,\tau)\geq0,\quad
\gamma(\rho,\tau)\geq0\quad\text{for } 0\leq\rho\leq1,\quad 0\leq
t\leq T.
$$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Using the characteristic theory of hyperbolic equations, we can
transform   \eqref{eq58}--\eqref{eq61} into an ordinary
differential equations, the desired results readily follow from a
simple analysis of this transformed equations. See \cite{CW05} for
more details.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem3.3}
Let $f_{i}(\rho,\tau,\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$ $(i=1,2,3)$ be functions
defined in $[0,1]\times[0,T]\times\mathbb{R}^{3}$ are continuous in
all arguments and continuously differentiable in
$(\rho,\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$. Let $\nu(\rho,\tau)$ be as in Lemma
\ref{lem3.2}, consider the following initial value problem:
\begin{gather}\label{eq64}
 \frac{\partial \alpha}{\partial \tau}+\nu(\rho,\tau)
\frac{\partial\alpha}{\partial\rho} =
f_{1}(\rho,\tau,\alpha,\beta,\gamma)\quad\text{for }
0\le\rho\le1,\; 0<\tau\leq T , \\
\label{eq65}
 \frac{\partial \beta}{\partial \tau}+\nu(\rho,\tau)
\frac{\partial\beta}{\partial\rho}
 =f_{2}(\rho,\tau,\alpha,\beta,\gamma)\quad\text{for }
 0\le\rho\le1,\; 0<\tau\leq T , \\
\label{eq66}
 \frac{\partial \gamma}{\partial \tau}+\nu(\rho,\tau)
 \frac{\partial\gamma}{\partial\rho}
 =f_{3}(\rho,\tau,\alpha,\beta,\gamma)\quad\text{for }
 0\le\rho\le1,\; 0<\tau\leq T , \\
 \label{eq67}
\alpha(\rho,0)=\alpha_{0}(\rho),\quad \beta(\rho,0)=\beta_{0}(\rho), \quad
 \gamma(\rho,0)=\gamma_{0}(\rho) \quad\text{for }
0\leq\rho\leq1.
\end{gather}
If $\alpha_{0}$, $\beta_{0}$, $\gamma_{0}\in C^{1}[0,1]$, then there
exists $0<T_{1}\leq T$ depending only on $M_{0}=\|(\alpha_{0},
\beta_{0}, \gamma_{0}\|_{\infty}$ and supremum norms of $f_{i}$,
$\frac{\partial f_{i}}{\partial\alpha}$, $\frac{\partial
f_{i}}{\partial\beta}$, $\frac{\partial f_{i}}{\partial\gamma}$
$(i=1,2,3)$ on the set
$[0,1]\times[0,T]\times[-2M_{0},2M_{0}]\times[-2M_{0},2M_{0}]
\times[-2M_{0},2M_{0}]$ such that the above problem has a unique
weak solution in $[0,1]\times[0,T_{1}]$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{eq68}
\|(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq 2M_{0}.
\end{equation}
 Furthermore, if $\alpha_{0}$, $\beta_{0}$, $\gamma_{0}\in
C^{1}[0,1]$, then this weak solution is actually a classical
solution, and the following estimate holds
\begin{equation}\label{eq69}
\begin{aligned}
&\|(\frac{\partial\alpha}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial\beta}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial\gamma}{\partial\rho})\|_{L^{\infty}}\\
& \leq e^{T(A(T)+B_{0}(T))}\Big(\|(\alpha'_{0}, \beta'_{0},
\gamma'_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}}+Te^{TA(T)}\big\|(\frac{\partial
f_{1}}{\partial\rho}, \frac{\partial f_{2}}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial f_{3}}{\partial\rho})\big\|_{L^{\infty}}\Big),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $A(T)=\|\frac{\partial \nu}{\partial\rho}\|_{L^{\infty}}$, and
$B_{0}(T)=\max_{1\leq i\leq3} \max \{\|\frac{\partial
f_{i}}{\partial\alpha}\|_{L^{\infty}},\|\frac{\partial
f_{i}}{\partial\beta}\|_{L^{\infty}},\|\frac{\partial
f_{i}}{\partial\gamma}\|_{L^{\infty}}\}$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Using the same argument as that of Lemma \ref{lem3.2}, and via a
standard contraction argument, we can prove Lemma \ref{lem3.3}. See
\cite{CW05} for more details.
\end{proof}

\section{Existence of a local solution}

 From the assumptions (A1)--(A4) in Section 1 and transformation
\eqref{eq32} in Section 2, we can readily verify the following
conditions hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(B1)]  $f$, $g$ and $h$ are $C^1$-smooth functions;

\item[(B2)] $g_{ij}$ $(i,j=1,2,3)$ are $C^1$-smooth functions;

\item[(B3)] $p_{0}$, $q_{0}$ and $d_{0}$ are $C^1$-smooth functions;

\item[(B4)]  $c_{0}(|x|)$, $w_{0}(|x|)\in D_{p}(B_{1})$ for some
$p>5$.
\end{itemize}

We shall prove the local existence and uniqueness of solution to
\eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47} by using Banach fixed point theorem and
then prove it is actually a global one in Section 5. To this
purpose, let
\begin{gather*}
M_{0}=\|(p_{0}, q_{0}, d_{0})\|_{L^\infty};\\
\begin{aligned}
A_{0}=2\max \{&|g_{ij}(c,w,p,q,d)|: 0\leq c\leq\bar{c},\; 0\leq
w\leq\bar{w},\\
&|p|\leq 2M_{0}, \; |q|\leq 2M_{0},\; |d|\leq 2M_{0}, \; i,j=1,2,3\};
\end{aligned}\\
\begin{aligned}
B_{0}=\max \{&|h(c,w,p,q,d)|:  0\leq c\leq\bar{c}, \;  0\leq
w\leq\bar{w},\\
&|p|\leq 2M_{0}, \; |q|\leq 2M_{0},\;  |d|\leq 2M_{0}\}.
\end{aligned}
\end{gather*}
Now, given $T>0$, we introduce a metric space $(X_{T},d)$ as
\begin{align*}
X_{T}=\Big\{&(\eta(\tau),c(\rho,\tau),w(\rho,\tau),p(\rho,\tau),
 q(\rho,\tau),d(\rho,\tau))\ (0\leq \rho\leq 1,\ 0\leq\tau\leq T):\\
 &(\eta, c, w, p, q, d)\text{ satisfying the following conditions (C1)--(C4)}\Big\},
\end{align*}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(C1)]  $\eta\in C[0,1]$, $\eta(0)=\eta_{0}$ and
$\frac{1}{2}\eta_{0}\leq\eta(\tau)\leq 2\eta_{0}$ $(0\leq\tau\leq
T)$;

\item[(C2)]  $c\in C([0,1]\times[0,T])$, $c(\rho,0)=c_{0}(\rho)$,
$c(1,\tau)=\bar{c}$ and $0\leq c(\rho,\tau)\leq
\bar{c}$ for $0\leq\rho\leq 1$, $0\leq\tau\leq T$;

\item[(C3)]  $w\in C([0,1]\times[0,T])$, $w(\rho,0)=w_{0}(\rho)$,
$w(1,\tau)=\bar{w}$ and $0\leq w(\rho,\tau)\leq
\bar{w}$ for $0\leq\rho\leq 1$, $0\leq\tau\leq T$;

\item[(C4)]  $p(\rho,\tau)$, $q(\rho,\tau)$, $d(\rho,\tau)\in
C([0,1]\times[0,T])$, $p(\rho,0)=p_{0}(\rho)$,
$q(\rho,0)=q_{0}(\rho)$, $d(\rho,0)=d_{0}(\rho)$ and
$|p(\rho,\tau)|\leq 2M_{0}$, $|q(\rho,\tau)|\leq 2M_{0}$,
$|d(\rho,\tau)|\leq 2M_{0}$ for $0\leq\rho\leq 1$, $0\leq\tau\leq
T$.
\end{itemize}
The metric $d$ in $X_{T}$ is defined by
\begin{align*}
&d\Big((\eta_{1}, c_{1}, w_{1}, p_{1}, q_{1},d_{1}),(\eta_{2},c_{2},
w_{2}, p_{2}, q_{2}, d_{2})\Big)\\
&=\|\eta_{1}-\eta_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}+\|c_{1}-c_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}
+\|w_{1}-w_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}\\
&\quad +\|p_{1}-p_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}+
\|q_{1}-q_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}+\|d_{1}-d_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}.
\end{align*}
It is easy to see $(X_{T},d)$ is a complete metric space.

Given any $(\eta, c, w, p, q, d)\in X_{T}$, set
\begin{gather*}
u(\rho,\tau)=\frac{\eta^{2}(\tau)}{\rho^{2}}
 \int^{\rho}_{0}h(c(s,\tau), w(s,\tau), p(s,\tau), q(s,\tau),
d(s,\tau))s^{2}ds,\\
\nu(\rho,\tau)=u(\rho,\tau)-\rho u(1,\tau),\\
\phi(\rho,\tau)=\eta^{2}(\tau)f(c(s,\tau),p(s,\tau),q(s,\tau)),\\
\varphi(\rho,\tau)=\eta^{2}(\tau)g(w(s,\tau), p(s,\tau), q(s,\tau)).
\end{gather*}
Consider the following problem for $(\tilde{\eta}, \tilde{c},
\tilde{w}, \tilde{p},\tilde{q},\tilde{d})$:
\begin{gather}\label{eq70}
\frac{d\tilde{\eta}}{d\tau}=\tilde{\eta}(\tau)u(1,\tau)\quad\text{for } 0<\tau\le T, \\
 \label{eq71}
\tilde{\eta}(0)=\eta_{0}, \\
 \label{eq72}
\frac{\partial\tilde{c}}{\partial\tau}=\frac{D_{1}}{\rho^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\rho}(\rho^{2}\frac{\partial\tilde{c}}{\partial\rho})
+u(1,\tau)\rho\frac{\partial\tilde{c}}{\partial\rho}-\phi(\rho,\tau)\tilde{c}
\quad\text{for }0<\rho<1,\;  0<\tau\le T, \\
 \label{eq73}
\frac{\partial\tilde{c}}{\partial\rho}(0,\tau)=0,\quad
\tilde{c}(1,\tau)=\bar{c}\quad\text{for } 0<\tau\le T, \\
 \label{eq74}
\tilde{c}(\rho,0)=c_{0}(\rho)\quad\text{for } 0\leq\rho\leq1, \\
\label{eq75}
\frac{\partial\tilde{w}}{\partial\tau}
=\frac{D_{2}}{\rho^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\rho}(\rho^{2}
\frac{\partial\tilde{w}}{\partial\rho})
+u(1,\tau)\rho\frac{\partial\tilde{w}}{\partial\rho}
-\varphi(\rho,\tau)\tilde{w}
\quad\text{for } 0<\rho<1,\;  0<\tau\le T, \\
\label{eq76} \frac{\partial\tilde{w}}{\partial\rho}(0,\tau)=0,\quad
\tilde{w}(1,\tau)=\bar{w}\quad\text{for } 0<\tau\le T, \\
\label{eq77}
\tilde{w}(\rho,0)=w_{0}(\rho)\quad\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1, \\
 \label{eq78}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{p}}{\partial\tau}
 +\nu\frac{\partial\tilde{p}}{\partial\rho}=
\eta^{2}[g_{11}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w}, \tilde{p},\tilde{q},
\tilde{d})\tilde{p}+ g_{12}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w}, \tilde{p},
\tilde{q}, \tilde{d})\tilde{q}+ g_{13}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w},
\tilde{p}, \tilde{q}, \tilde{d})\tilde{d}]\\
\text{for }  0\le\rho\leq 1,\; 0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered} \\
\label{eq79}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{q}}{\partial\tau}
 +\nu\frac{\partial\tilde{q}}{\partial\rho}=
\eta^{2}[g_{21}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w}, \tilde{p},\tilde{q},
\tilde{d})\tilde{p}+ g_{22}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w}, \tilde{p},
\tilde{q}, \tilde{d})\tilde{q}+ g_{23}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w},
\tilde{p}, \tilde{q}, \tilde{d})\tilde{d}]\\
\text{for } 0\le\rho\leq 1,\; 0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered} \\
\label{eq80}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{d}}{\partial\tau}
+\nu\frac{\partial\tilde{d}}{\partial\rho}=
\eta^{2}[g_{31}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w}, \tilde{p},\tilde{q},
\tilde{d})\tilde{p}+ g_{32}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w}, \tilde{p},
\tilde{q}, \tilde{d})\tilde{q}+ g_{33}(\tilde{c}, \tilde{w},
\tilde{p}, \tilde{q}, \tilde{d})\tilde{d}]\\
\text{for }  0\le\rho\leq 1,\;  0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered} \\
 \label{eq81}
\tilde{p}(\rho,0)=p_{0}(\rho), \quad \tilde{q}(\rho,0) =q_{0}(\rho),
\quad \tilde{d}(\rho,0)=d_{0}(\rho)\quad\text{for }0\le\rho\leq 1.
\end{gather}
With this problem solved, we define a mapping $F:(\eta, c, w, p,
q, d)\mapsto(\tilde{\eta}, \tilde{c}, \tilde{w}, \tilde{p},
\tilde{q}, \tilde{d})$. Next we shall prove that $F$ is a
contraction mapping from $X_{T}$ to $X_{T}$ provided $T$ is
sufficiently small.

\textbf{Step 1} First we prove $F$ maps $X_{T}$ into itself. It is
obvious that \eqref{eq70}--\eqref{eq71} has a unique solution
$\tilde{\eta}\in C^{1}[0,T]$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq82}
\tilde{\eta}(\tau)=\eta_{0}\exp\{\int^{\tau}_{0}u(1,s)ds\}\quad
\text{for }0\le\tau\leq T.
\end{equation}
 From the fact that $\|h(c(\rho,\tau), w(\rho,\tau), p(\rho,\tau),
q(\rho,\tau), d(\rho,\tau))\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq B_{0}$ and
$\frac{1}{2}\eta_0<\eta(\tau)\leq2\eta_{0}$, we know $\|u(1,
\tau)\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq \frac{4}{3}B_{0}\eta^{2}_{0}$, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq83}
\eta_{0}\exp\{-\frac{4}{3}B_{0}\eta^{2}_{0}T\}
\leq\tilde{\eta}(\tau)\leq\eta_{0}\exp\{\frac{4}{3}B_{0}\eta^{2}_{0}T\}
\quad\text{for } 0\le\tau\leq T.
\end{equation}
So if we choose $T$ sufficiently small such that
$\exp\{\frac{4}{3}B_{0}\eta^{2}_{0}T\}\leq2$, we have
$\frac{1}{2}\eta_{0}\leq\tilde{\eta}\leq2\eta_{0}$, that implies
$\tilde{\eta}$ satisfies the condition (C1).

Next we consider  \eqref{eq72}--\eqref{eq74} and
\eqref{eq75}--\eqref{eq77}. Since $c_{0}(|x|)$, $w_{0}(|x|)\in
D_{p}(B_{1})$ for some $p>5$, then from Lemma \ref{lem3.1} we know
\eqref{eq72}--\eqref{eq74} and  \eqref{eq75}--\eqref{eq77} has a
unique solution $\tilde{c}(|x|,\tau)\in W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})$ and
$\tilde{w}(|x|,\tau)\in W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})$, respectively. According
to the embedding theorem, $W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})\hookrightarrow
C^{\lambda, \frac{\lambda}{2}}(\overline{Q}_{T})$, where
$\lambda=2-\frac{5}{p}$ (see \cite{LSU68}), then we know
$\tilde{c}(|x|,\tau)$, $\tilde{w}(|x|,\tau)\in C([0,1]\times[0,T])$.
By applying the maximum principle we have
$0\leq\tilde{c}\leq\bar{c}$ and $0\leq\tilde{w}\leq\bar{w}$.
Furthermore, by \eqref{eq56} and the embedding  $
W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})\hookrightarrow C^{1+\lambda,
\frac{1+\lambda}{2}}(\overline{Q}_{T})$ with $\lambda=1-\frac{5}{p}$
(see \cite{LSU68}), we have
$$
\|\frac{\partial \tilde{c}}{\partial \rho}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq A(T),
\quad \|\frac{\partial \tilde{w}}{\partial \rho}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq
A(T).
$$
From above results, we know $\tilde{c}$ satisfies the condition (C2)
and $\tilde{w}$ satisfies the condition (C3).

Finally we consider \eqref{eq78}--\eqref{eq81}. Since
$\nu(\rho,\tau)$, $\tilde{c}(\rho,\tau)$ and $\tilde{w}(\rho,\tau)$
are continuously differentiable, then from Lemma \ref{lem3.3} we
obtain that if we take $T$ small enough, \eqref{eq78}--\eqref{eq81}
has a unique classical solution $(\tilde{p}, \tilde{q},
\tilde{d})\in C^{1}([0,1]\times[0,T])$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{eq84}
|\tilde{p}|\leq 2M_{0},\quad |\tilde{q}|\leq 2M_{0},\quad
|\tilde{d}|\leq 2M_{0} \quad\text{for } 0\leq\rho\leq1, \;
0\leq\tau\leq T.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, by \eqref{eq69} in Lemma \ref{lem3.3}, if $T$ is small
enough, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq85}
\|\Big(\frac{\partial\tilde{p}}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial\tilde{q}}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial\tilde{d}}{\partial\rho}\Big)\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq2M_{1}
\quad\text{for }  0\leq\rho\leq1, \; 0\leq\tau\leq T,
\end{equation}

where $M_{1}=\|(p'_{0}, q'_{0}, d'_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}}$. This
implies $\tilde{p}$, $\tilde{q}$ and $\tilde{d}$ satisfy the
condition (C4).

Now we can see that for a sufficiently small $T$,
$F:X_{T}\mapsto X_{T}$ is well-defined. To obtain the desired result
we only need to prove $F:X_{T}\mapsto X_{T}$ is a contraction mapping
if $T$ is further small enough.

\textbf{Step 2} Let $(\eta_{i}, c_{i}, w_{i}, p_{i}, q_{i},
d_{i})\in X_{T}$ $(i=1,2)$, set
\begin{gather*}
u_{i}(\rho,\tau)=\frac{\eta_{i}^{2}(\tau)}{\rho^{2}}
\int^{\rho}_{0}h(c_{i}(s,\tau), w_{i}(s,\tau), p_{i}(s,\tau),
 q_{i}(s,\tau), d_{i}(s,\tau))s^{2}ds,\\
\nu_{i}(\rho,\tau)=u_{i}(\rho,\tau)-\rho u_{i}(1,\tau),\\
(\tilde{\eta}_{i}, \tilde{c}_{i}, \tilde{w}_{i}, \tilde{p}_{i},
\tilde{q}_{i}, \tilde{d}_{i})=F(\eta_{i}, c_{i}, w_{i}, p_{i},
q_{i},
d_{i}),\\
d=d\Big((\eta_{1}, c_{1}£¬w_{1}, p_{1}, q_{1}, d_{1}), (\eta_{2},
c_{2}, w_{2}, p_{2}, q_{2}, d_{2}) \Big).
\end{gather*}
Firstly from $\|h(c_{i}(\rho,\tau), w_{i}(\rho,\tau),
p_{i}(\rho,\tau), q_{i}(\rho,\tau),
d_{i}(\rho,\tau))\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq B_{0}$ and
$\frac{1}{2}\eta_0<\eta_{i}(\tau)\leq2\eta_{0}$, we  can easily
calculate that
\begin{equation}\label{eq86}
|u_{1}(\rho,\tau)-u_{2}(\rho,\tau)|\leq A(T)d.
\end{equation}
Then by \eqref{eq82} we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq87}
\|\tilde{\eta}_{1}-\tilde{\eta}_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq\max_{0\leq\tau\leq
T}|\tilde{\eta}_{1}(\tau)-\tilde{\eta}_{2}(\tau)|\leq TA(T)d.
\end{equation}
Next, let $\tilde{c}_{*}=\tilde{c}_{1}-\tilde{c}_{2}$ and
$\tilde{w}_{*}=\tilde{w}_{1}-\tilde{w}_{2}$, we
have\begin{gather}\label{eq88}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{c}_{*}}{\partial\tau}
=\frac{D_{1}}{\rho^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\rho}(\rho^{2}
\frac{\partial\tilde{c}_{*}}{\partial\rho})
+u_{1}(1,\tau)\rho\frac{\partial\tilde{c}_{*}}{\partial\rho}
-\phi(\rho,\tau)\tilde{c}_{*}+F(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for }0<\rho<1,\; 0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered}\\
 \label{eq89}
\frac{\partial\tilde{c}_{*}}{\partial\rho}(0,\tau)=0,\quad
\tilde{c}_{*}(1,\tau)=0\quad\text{for } 0\leq\tau\leq T, \\
 \label{eq90}
\tilde{c}_{*}(\rho,0)=0\quad\text{for }0\leq\rho\leq1, \\
 \label{eq91}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{w}_{*}}{\partial\tau}=\frac{D_{2}}{\rho^{2}}
 \frac{\partial}{\partial\rho}(\rho^{2}
 \frac{\partial\tilde{w}_{*}}{\partial\rho})
+u_{1}(1,\tau)\rho\frac{\partial\tilde{w}_{*}}{\partial\rho}
 -\varphi(\rho,\tau)\tilde{w}_{*}+G(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for } 0<\rho<1,\;  0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered}\\
 \label{eq92}
\frac{\partial\tilde{w}_{*}}{\partial\rho}(0,\tau)=0,\quad
\tilde{w}_{*}(1,\tau)=0\quad\text{for } 0\leq\tau\leq T, \\
 \label{eq93}
\tilde{w}_{*}(\rho,0)=0\quad\text{for } 0\leq\rho\leq1,
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather*}
 \phi(\rho,\tau)=\eta_{1}^{2}(\tau)f(c_{1}(s,\tau),
 p_{1}(s,\tau),q_{1}(s,\tau)),\\
 \varphi(\rho,\tau)=\eta_{1}^{2}(\tau)g(w_{1}(s,\tau),
  p_{1}(s,\tau), q_{1}(s,\tau)),
\\
 F(\rho,\tau)=[u_{1}(1,\tau)-u_{2}(1,\tau)]\rho
 \frac{\partial\tilde{c}_{2}}{\partial \rho}+[\eta_{2}^{2}(\tau)f(c_{2},
 p_{2},q_{2})-\eta_{1}^{2}(\tau)f(c_{1}, p_{1},q_{1})]\tilde{c}_{2},
\\
G(\rho,\tau)=[u_{1}(1,\tau)-u_{2}(1,\tau)]
\rho\frac{\partial\tilde{w}_{2}}{\partial
\rho}+[\eta_{2}^{2}(\tau)g(w_{2}, p_{2}, q_{2})
-\eta_{1}^{2}(\tau)g(w_{1}, p_{1},
q_{1})]\tilde{w}_{2}.
\end{gather*}
As for $\tilde{c}$, from the Lemma \ref{lem3.1} we know
$\|\frac{\partial \tilde{c}_{2}}{\partial \rho}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq
A(T)$ and $0\leq \tilde{c}_{2}(\rho,\tau)\leq \bar{c}$ by maximum
principle. Note that $f$ is continuously differentiable and
$\eta_{i}$, $p_{i}$, $q_{i}$ are bounded, so we can deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{eq94}
\|F\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq
A(T)\|u_{1}-u_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}+\|\eta^{2}_{2}f(c_{2}, p_{2},
q_{2})-\eta^{2}_{1}f(c_{1}, p_{1}, q_{1})\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq A(T)d.
\end{equation}
Then from Lemma \ref{lem3.1} again we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eq95}
\|\tilde{c}_{1}-\tilde{c}_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}
=\|\tilde{c}_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq T\|F\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq TA(T)d.
\end{equation}
Similarly, for $\tilde{w}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq96}
\|G\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq A(T)\|u_{1}-u_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}+A(T)d\leq
A(T)d.
\end{equation}
Then from Lemma \ref{lem3.1} again we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq97}
\|\tilde{w}_{1}-\tilde{w}_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}
=\|\tilde{w}_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq
T\|G\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq TA(T)d.
\end{equation}
Finally, letting  $\tilde{p}_{*}=\tilde{p}_{1}-\tilde{p}_{2}$,
$\tilde{q}_{*}=\tilde{q}_{1}-\tilde{q}_{2}$,
$\tilde{d}_{*}=\tilde{d}_{1}-\tilde{d}_{2}$, we have:
\begin{gather}\label{eq98}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{p}_{*}}{\partial\tau}+\nu_{1}
 \frac{\partial\tilde{p}_{*}}{\partial\rho}=
\lambda_{11}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{p}_{*}+
\lambda_{12}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{q}_{*}+
\lambda_{13}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{d}_{*}
+F_{1}(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for }0\le\rho\leq 1,\; 0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered} \\
 \label{eq99}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{q}_{*}}{\partial\tau}
 +\nu_{1}\frac{\partial\tilde{q}_{*}}{\partial\rho}=
\lambda_{21}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{p}_{*}+
\lambda_{22}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{q}_{*}+
\lambda_{23}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{d}_{*}
+F_{2}(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for }0\le\rho\leq 1,\ \; 0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered}\\
 \label{eq100}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial\tilde{d}_{*}}{\partial\tau}
 +\nu_{1}\frac{\partial\tilde{d}_{*}}{\partial\rho}=
\lambda_{31}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{p}_{*}+
\lambda_{32}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{q}_{*}+
\lambda_{33}(\rho,\tau)\tilde{d}_{*}
+F_{3}(\rho,\tau)\\
\text{for } 0\le\rho\leq 1,\; 0<\tau\le T,
\end{gathered} \\
 \label{eq101}
\tilde{p}_{*}(\rho,0)=0,
\quad\tilde{q}_{*}(\rho,0)=0,\quad\tilde{d}_{*}(\rho,0)
=0\quad\text{for } 0\leq\rho\leq 1,
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather*}
\lambda_{ij}=\eta^{2}_{1}(\tau)g_{ij}(\tilde{c}_{1}, \tilde{w}_{1},
\tilde{p}_{1}, \tilde{q}_{1}, \tilde{d}_{1})\quad (i,j=1,2,3),
\\
F_{i}(\rho,\tau)=(\nu_{2}-\nu_{1})\frac{\partial
\tilde{\xi}_{i}}{\partial\rho}+\sum^{3}_{j=1}[\eta^{2}_{1}g_{ij}(\tilde{c}_{1},
\tilde{w}_{1}, \tilde{p}_{1}, \tilde{q}_{1},
\tilde{d}_{1})-\eta^{2}_{2}g_{ij}(\tilde{c}_{2}, \tilde{w}_{2},
\tilde{p}_{2}, \tilde{q}_{2}, \tilde{d}_{2})]\tilde{\xi}_{j},
\end{gather*}
and $\tilde{\xi}_{1}=\tilde{p}_{2}$,
$\tilde{\xi}_{2}=\tilde{q}_{2}$, $\tilde{\xi}_{3}=\tilde{d}_{2}$.
Then from \eqref{eq84}--\eqref{eq85} we know that
\begin{gather*}
\|\tilde{p}_{i}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq2M_{0},\quad
\|\tilde{q}_{i}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq2M_{0},\quad
\|\tilde{d}_{i}\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq2M_{0}, \quad i=1,2,\\
\|(\frac{\partial\tilde{p}_{i}}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial\tilde{q}_{i}}{\partial\rho},
\frac{\partial\tilde{d}_{i}}{\partial\rho})\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq
2M_{1}, \quad i=1,2,
\end{gather*}
and since $g_{ij}$ $(i,j=1,2,3)$ are continuously differentiable, we
deduce that
\begin{equation} \label{eq102}
\begin{aligned}
\|F_{i}\|_{L^{\infty}} &\leq A(T)\|\nu_{1}-\nu_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}}
+A(T)\sum^{3}_{j=1}\|\eta^{2}_{1}g_{ij}(\tilde{c}_{1},
\tilde{w}_{1}, \tilde{p}_{1}, \tilde{q}_{1},
\tilde{d}_{1}) \\
&\quad -\eta^{2}_{2}g_{ij}(\tilde{c}_{2}, \tilde{w}_{2},
\tilde{p}_{2}, \tilde{q}_{2}, \tilde{d}_{2})\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq
A(T)d,\quad i=1,2,3.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It is easy to see $\lambda_{ij}$ $(i,j=1,2,3)$ are bounded by a
constant independent of the choice of $(\eta_{i}, c_{i}, p_{i},
q_{i}, d_{i})$, so from \eqref{eq69} in Lemma \ref{lem3.3} and
\eqref{eq102} we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq103}
\|(\tilde{p}_{1}-\tilde{p}_{2}, \tilde{q}_{1}-\tilde{q}_{2},
\tilde{d}_{1}-\tilde{d}_{2})\|_{L^{\infty}}=\|(\tilde{p}_{*},
\tilde{q}_{*}, \tilde{d}_{*})\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq TA(T)d.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq85}, \eqref{eq95}, \eqref{eq97} and \eqref{eq103} we
 conclude that
\[
d\Big((\tilde{\eta}_{1}, \tilde{c}_{1}, \tilde{w}_{1},
\tilde{p}_{1}, \tilde{q}_{1}, \tilde{d}_{1}), (\tilde{\eta}_{2},
\tilde{c}_{2}, \tilde{w}_{2}, \tilde{p}_{2}, \tilde{q}_{2},
\tilde{d}_{2}) \Big)\leq TA(T)d.
\]
Hence, if we choose $T$ sufficiently small such that $TA(T)<1$, then
$F$ is a contraction mapping from $X_{T}$ into $X_{T}$.

According to the Banach fixed point theorem we know that if $T$ is
small enough then $F$ has a unique fixed point $(\eta, c, w, p, q,
d)$ for $0\leq\tau\leq T$. By the definition of the mapping $F$, it
is clearly that $(\eta, c, w, p, q, d)$ is the unique solution of
the problem \eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47} for $0\leq\tau\leq T$.

\begin{theorem}\label{Th4.1}
Under the assumptions of Theorem \ref{Th1.1}, there exists $T>0$
depending only on $\|c_{0}(|x|)\|_{D_{p}(B_{R_{0}})}$,
$\|w_{0}(|x|)\|_{D_{p}(B_{R_{0}})}$, $\|(p_{0}, q_{0},
d_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}}$, $\|(p'_{0}, q'_{0},
d'_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}}$, such that the problem
\eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47} has a unique solution for $0\leq \tau\leq
T$.
\end{theorem}

\section{Existence of global solutions}


Note that from Theorem \ref{Th4.1} we know
\eqref{eq33}--\eqref{eq47} has a unique local solution, then by
Lemma \ref{lem2.1}, we know the problem \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27}
has also a unique local solution for $0\leq \tau\leq T$, where $T$
is some positive constant which may depend on the bound of $R_{0}$,
$\|C_{0}(|x|)\|_{D_{p}(B_{R_{0}})}$,
$\|W_{0}(|x|)\|_{D_{p}(B_{R_{0}})}$, $\|(P_{0}, Q_{0},
D_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}(B_{R_{0}})}$ and $\|(P'_{0}, Q'_{0},
D'_{0})\|_{L^{\infty}(B_{R_{0}})}$. To get the global result of
Theorem \ref{Th1.1}, we establish the following two preliminary
lemmas.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem5.1}
Under the assumptions of Theorem \ref{Th1.1}, if
$$
\Big(R(t), C(r,t), W(r,t), P(r,t), Q(r,t), D(r,t)\Big)
$$
is a solution of \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} for  $0\leq t<T$, then
\begin{gather}\label{eq104}
0\leq C(r,t)\leq \bar{C}\quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq
R(t),\; 0\leq t< T, \\
 \label{eq105}
0\leq W(r,t)\leq \bar{W}\quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq
R(t),\; 0\leq t< T,\\
 \label{eq106}
P(r,t)\geq 0, \quad  Q(r,t)\geq 0, \quad D(r,t)\geq 0
\quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R(t),\; 0\leq t<T, \\
 \label{eq107}
P(r,t)+ Q(r,t)+D(r,t)=N \quad\text{for } 0\leq r\leq R(t),\;
0\leq t<T, \\
 \label{eq108}
R_{0}\exp\{-\frac{1}{3}B_{0}t\}\leq R(t)\leq
R_{0}\exp\{\frac{1}{3}B_{0}t\} \quad\text{for } 0\leq t<T, \\
 \label{eq109}
-\frac{1}{3}B_{0}R(t)\leq \frac{dR(t)}{dt}\leq \frac{1}{3}B_{0}R(t)
\quad\text{for } 0\leq t<T,
\end{gather}
where
$$
B_{0}=\max\{|h(C, W, P, Q, D)|:   0\leq C\leq \bar{C}, \; 0\leq
W\leq \bar{W},\;  0\leq P,\;  Q,\;  D\leq N\}.
$$
\end{lemma}


\begin{proof}
Note that \eqref{eq104} and \eqref{eq105}  are immediate results by
applying the maximum principle. From \eqref{eq28} in Remark
\ref{rmk1.1} and Lemma \ref{lem3.3} we know \eqref{eq106} holds. To
prove \eqref{eq107} we represent $M(r,t)=P(r,t)+Q(r,t)+D(r,t)$, then
summing up \eqref{eq21}--\eqref{eq23} and using \eqref{eq29} in
Remark \ref{rmk1.1}, we can get $M(r,t)$ satisfies the following
equation:
\begin{gather}\label{eq110}
\frac{\partial M}{\partial t}+v\frac{\partial M}{\partial
r}=\frac{1}{N}[K_{B}(C)-K_{R}D](N-M)\quad\text{for }0\leq r\leq
R(t),\;  0\leq t<T, \\
 \label{eq111}
M(r,0)=P_{0}(r)+Q_{0}(r)+D_{0}(r)=N \quad \text{for }0\leq r\leq
R_{0}.
\end{gather}
It is clear that $M(r,t)=N$ is a solution of
\eqref{eq110}--\eqref{eq111}, by uniqueness we obtain that
$M(r,t)=N$ for all $0\leq r\leq R(t)$, $0\leq t<T$, this completes
the proof of \eqref{eq107}. From \eqref{eq106} and \eqref{eq107} we
get
$$
0\leq P(r,t),\ Q(r,t), \ R(r,t)\leq N\quad\text{for }0\leq r\leq
R(t),\; 0\leq t<T.
$$
It is obvious that  $|h(C,W,P,Q,D)|\leq B_{0}$, then by
\eqref{eq24}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq112}
-\frac{1}{3}B_{0}r\leq v(r,t)\leq \frac{1}{3}B_{0}r \quad\text{for }
 0\leq r\leq R(t),\; 0\leq t<T.
\end{equation}
 From \eqref{eq26} we can see
$$
 -\frac{1}{3}B_{0}R(t)\leq \frac{dR(t)}{dt}\leq
 \frac{1}{3}B_{0}R(t).
$$
Hence, we complete the proof of \eqref{eq109}. \eqref{eq108} is an
immediate consequence of \eqref{eq109}.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{lem5.2}
Under the assumptions of Theorem \ref{Th1.1}, if
$$
\Big(R(t), C(r,t), W(r,t), P(r,t), Q(r,t), D(r,t)\Big)
$$
is a solution of \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} for $0\leq t<T$, then
\begin{gather}\label{eq113}
\begin{gathered}
\|C(r,t)\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}\leq A(T),\quad
\|W(r,t)\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}\leq A(T)\\
\text{for }0\leq r\leq R(t),\; 0\leq t< T,
\end{gathered} \\
 \label{eq114}
\|(\frac{\partial P}{\partial r}, \frac{\partial Q}{\partial r},
\frac{\partial D}{\partial r})\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq A(T)\quad
\text{for }0\leq r\leq R(t),\; 0\leq t< T.
\end{gather}
An immediate consequence from \eqref{eq113} we obtain that for any
$t_{0}\in [0,T)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq115}
\|C(r, t_{0})\|_{D_{p}(B(t_{0}))}\leq A(T),\quad
 \|W(r, t_{0})\|_{D_{p}(B(t_{0}))}\leq A(T).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
From Lemma \ref{lem5.1} we know $R(t)$ has a positive lower bound
$R_{0}\exp\{-\frac{1}{3}B_{0}T\}$ and a finite upper bound
$R_{0}\exp\{\frac{1}{3}B_{0}T\}$, $\frac{dR(t)}{dt}$ is also bound
for $0\leq t<T$, by \eqref{eq106} and \eqref{eq107} we know $P$, $Q$
and $D$ are also bound. Let
$$
c(x,t)=C(|x|R(t),t),\quad  w(x,t)=W(|x|R(t),t)\quad \text{for }
|x|\leq 1, \;  0\leq t<T,
$$
and we denote $\dot{R}(t)=\frac{dR(t)}{dt}$. Then from
\eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq17} and \eqref{eq18}--\eqref{eq20} we can see
that $c$ is a solution of the following problem:
\begin{gather}\label{eq116}
 \frac{\partial c}{\partial t}=\frac{D_{1}}{R^{2}(t)}\Delta c
+\frac{\dot{R}(t)}{R(t)}(x\cdot \nabla c)-f(x,t)c\quad\text{for }
|x|<1,\;  0<t<T, \\
 \label{eq117}
c(x,t)=\bar{C}\quad\text{for }|x|=1, \; 0<t<T, \\
 \label{eq118}
c(x,0)=C_{0}(|x|R_{0})\quad\text{for } |x|\leq 1,
\end{gather}
and $w$ is a solution of the following problem:
\begin{gather}\label{eq119}
 \frac{\partial w}{\partial t}=\frac{D_{2}}{R^{2}(t)}\Delta w
 +\frac{\dot{R}(t)}{R(t)}(x\cdot \nabla w)-g(x,t)w\quad\text{for }|x|<1,
 \;  0<t<T, \\
 \label{eq120}
w(x,t)=\bar{W}\quad\text{for }|x|=1, \; 0<t<T, \\
 \label{eq121}
w(x,0)=W_{0}(|x|R_{0})\quad\text{for } |x|\leq 1.
\end{gather}
Here
\begin{gather*}
 f(x,t)=F(C(|x|R(t),t), P(|x|R(t),t), Q(|x|R(t),t)), \\
 g(x,t)=G(W(|x|R(t),t), P(|x|R(t),t), Q(|x|R(t),t)).
\end{gather*}
 Since all coefficients in \eqref{eq116} and \eqref{eq119} are
bounded continuous functions, then from Lemma \ref{lem3.1}
we get
$$
\|c\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})}\leq A(T),\quad
\|w\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q_{T})}\leq A(T).
$$
Now transforming back to the original variables we know
$$
\|C(|x|, t)\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}\leq A(T),\quad \|W(|x|,
t)\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}\leq A(T).
$$
Besides, since all coefficients in \eqref{eq21}--\eqref{eq23} are
bounded continuously differentiable functions, so from Lemma
\ref{lem3.3} we get
$$
\|(\frac{\partial P}{\partial r}, \frac{\partial Q}{\partial r},
\frac{\partial D}{\partial r})\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq A(T)\quad
\text{for }0\leq r\leq R(t),\;  0\leq t< T.
$$
We complete the proof of Lemma \ref{lem5.2}.
\end{proof}


From  a priori estimates established in Lemma \ref{lem5.1} and Lemma
\ref{lem5.2}, now we can extend the local solution of
\eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} to the global one.


\begin{theorem}\label{Th5.3}
Under the assumptions  of Theorem \ref{Th1.1}, there exists a unique
global solution $\big(R(t)$, $C(r,t), W(r,t), P(r,t), Q(r,t),
D(r,t)\big)$ of \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27}.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
 From Section 4 we know that \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} has a
unique local (in time) solution, we can extend this local solution
step by step to get a solution defined in a maximal time interval
$[0,T)$ with either $T=\infty$ or $0<T<\infty$. In what follows we
show, by using the method of reducing into absurdity, that the
second case cannot occur. Hence we assume that $T<\infty$, then for
any $0<t, t_{0}<T$, from Lemma \ref{lem5.1} and Lemma \ref{lem5.2}
we have
\begin{gather*}
\|C(|x|,t)\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}\leq A(T),
\quad\|W(|x|,t)\|_{W^{2,1}_{p}(Q^{R}_{T})}\leq A(T), \\
\|C(|x|, t_{0})\|_{D_{p}(B(t_{0}))}\leq A(T),\quad
\|W(|x|, t_{0})\|_{D_{p}(B(t_{0}))}\leq A(T), \\
\|(P, Q, D)\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq A(T), \\
\|(\frac{\partial P}{\partial r}, \frac{\partial Q}{\partial r},
\frac{\partial D}{\partial r})\|_{L^{\infty}}\leq A(T), \\
R_{0}\exp\{-\frac{1}{3}B_{0}t\}\leq R(t)\leq
R_{0}\exp\{\frac{1}{3}B_{0}t\}, \\
-\frac{1}{3}B_{0}R(t)\leq \frac{dR(t)}{dt}\leq \frac{1}{3}B_{0}R(t).
\end{gather*}
Hence if we consider the initial value problem
\eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} with initial data given at $t_{0}$ for
every $t_{0}\in[0,T)$, then by Theorem \ref{Th4.1}, there exists a
common constant $\delta>0$ such that the problem
\eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27} always has a solution on the time
interval $[t_{0}, t_{0}+\delta)$. It follows that the solution
$\Big(R(t), C(r,t), W(r,t), P(r,t), Q(r,t), D(r,t)\Big)$ is extended
to the time interval $[0, T+\delta)$, which contradicts the
definition of $T$. Hence the solution of \eqref{eq15}--\eqref{eq27}
exists for all $t\geq 0$.
\end{proof}

By Lemma \ref{lem2.1} and Theorem \ref{Th5.3}, we accomplish the
proof of Theorem \ref{Th1.1}.

\begin{thebibliography}{00}

\bibitem{BC95} {H. M. Byrne and  M. A. J. Chaplian};
\emph{Growth of nonnecrotic tumours in the presence and absence of
inhibitors}, \textit{Math. Biosci.}, \textbf{130} (1995), 151--181.


\bibitem{BC96}  {H. M. Byrne and M. A. J. Chaplian};
\emph{Growth of necrotic tumours in the presence and absence of
inhibitors}, \textit{Math. Biosci.}, \textbf{135} (1996), 187--216.


\bibitem{C06} {S. Cui};
\emph{Existence of a stationary solution for the modified Ward-King
tumor growth model}, \textit{Advances in Appl. Math.}, \textbf{36}
(2006), 421--445.

\bibitem{C08} {S. Cui};
\emph{Asymptotic stability of the stationary solution for a
hyperbolic free boundary problem modeling tumor growth},
\textit{SIAM J. Math. Anal.}, \textbf{40} (2008), No. 4, 1692--1724.


\bibitem{C09} {S. Cui};
\emph{Lie group action and stability analysis of stationary
solutions for a free boundary problem modelling tumor growth},
\textit{J. Diff. Equa.}, \textbf{246} (2009), 1845--1882.


\bibitem{CE07}  {S. Cui and J. Escher};
\emph{Bifurcation analysis of an elliptic free boundary problem
modelling the growth of avascular tumors}, \textit{SIAM J. Math.
Anal.}, \textbf{39} (2007), 210--235.


\bibitem{CE08}  {S. Cui and J. Escher};
\emph{Asymptotic behavior of solutions of multidimensional moving
boundary problem modeling tumor growth}, \textit{Comm. Part. Diff.
Equa.}, \textbf{33} (2008), 636--655.


\bibitem{CE09}  {S. Cui and J. Escher};
\emph{Well-posedness and stability of a multidimentional moving
boundary problem modeling the growth of tumors}, \textit{Arch. Rat.
Mech. Anal.}, \textbf{191} (2009), 173--193.

\bibitem{CHF03} {X. Chen and A. Friedman};
\emph{A free boundary problem for elliptic-hyperbolic system: an
application to tumor growth}, \textit{SIAM J. Math. Anal},
\textbf{35} (2003), 974--986.


\bibitem{CUF03} {S. Cui and A. Friedman};
\emph{A hyperbolic free boundary problem modeling tumor growth},
\textit{Interfaces and Free Boundaries}, \textbf{5} (2003),
159--181.


\bibitem{CUFr03} {S. Cui and A. Friedman};
\emph{A free boundary problem for a singular system of differential
equations: an application to a model of tumor growth},
\textit{Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.}, \textbf{355} (2003), 3537--3590.


\bibitem{CW05} {S. Cui and X. Wei};
\emph{Global Existence for a parabolic-hyperbolic free boundary
problem modelling tumor growth}, \textit{Acta. Math. Appl. Sinica,
English Series.}, Vol. 21, \textbf{No. 4} (2005), 597--614.

\bibitem{F04} {A. Friedman};
\emph{A hierarchy of cancer models and their mathematical
challenges}, \textit{Disc. Cont. Dyna. Syst. $($B$)$.}, \textbf{4}
(2004), 147--159 .

\bibitem{F06} {A. Friedman};
\emph{A free boundary problem for a coupled system of elliptic,
hyperbolic, and Stokes equations modeling tumor growth},
\textit{Interfaces and Free Boundaries.}, \textbf{8} (2006),
247--261.

\bibitem{F07} {A. Friedman};
\emph{Mathematical analysis and challenges arising from models of
tumor growth}, \textit{Math. Models \& Meth. Appl. Sci.},
\textbf{17}, suppl. (2007), 1751--1772.

\bibitem{FH06} {A. Friedman and B. Hu};
\emph{Asymptotic stability for a free boundary problem arising in a
tumor model}, \textit{J. Diff. Equa.}, \textbf{227} (2006),
598--639.

\bibitem{FH07} {A. Friedman and B. Hu};
\emph{Bifurcation for a free boundary problem modeling tumor growth
by Stokes equation}, \textit{ SIAM J. Math. Anal.}, \textbf{39}
(2007), 174--194.


\bibitem{G72} {H. Greenspan};
\emph{Models for the growth of solid tumors by diffusion},
\textit{Stud. Appl. Math}, \textbf{51} (1972), 317--340.


\bibitem{G76} {H. Greenspan};
\emph{On the growth and stability of cell cultures and solid
tumors}, \textit{J. Theor. Biol}, \textbf{56} (1976), 229--242.


\bibitem{J02} {T. L. Jackson};
\emph{Vascular tumor growth and treament: consequence of
polyclonality, competition and dynamic vascular support}, \textit{J.
Theor. Biol}, \textbf{44} (2002), 201--226.


\bibitem{JB00} {T. L. Jackson and H. M. Byrne};
\emph{A mathematical model to study the effects of drug resistance
and vasculature on the response of solid tumors to chemotherapy},
\textit{Math. Biosci}, \textbf{164} (2000), 17--38.


\bibitem{LSU68} {O. A. Ladyzenskaja, V. A. Solonnikov and N. N.
Ural'ceva}; \emph{Linear and Quasi-Linear Equations of Parabolic
Type}, \textit{Amer. Math. Soc. Transl}, \textbf{Vol. 23},
\textit{Amer. Math. Soc, RI,} 1968.


\bibitem{TC06} {Y. Tao and M, Chen};
\emph{An elliptic-hyperbolic free boundary problem modelling
 cancer therapy}, \textit{Nonlinearity}, \textbf{19} (2006), 419--440.

\bibitem{PPTM01} {G. Pettet, C. Please, M. Tindall and D. McElwain};
\emph{The migration of cells in multicell tumor spheroids},
\textit{Bull. Math. Biol.}, \textbf{63} (2001), 231--257.

\bibitem{WC07} {X. Wei and S, Cui};
\emph{Global well-posedness for a drug transport in tumor multicell
spheroids}, \textit{Math. Comput. Modelling},  \textbf{45} (2007),
553--563.


\bibitem{WK97} {J. P. Ward and J. R. King};
\emph{Mathematical modelling of avascular tumour growth I},
\textit{IMA J. Math. Appl. Med. Biol},  \textbf{14(1)} (1997),
39--69.


\bibitem{WK98} {J. P. Ward and J. R. King};
\emph{Mathematical modelling of avascular tumour growth II:
Modelling growth saturation}, \textit{IMA J. Math. Appl. Med. Biol},
\textbf{15} (1998), 1--42.


\bibitem{WK03} {J. P. Ward and J. R. King};
\emph{Mathematical modelling of drug transport model in tumor
multicell spheroids}, \textit{Math. Biosci}, \textbf{181} (2003),
177--207.

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
