Literature DB >> 10945652

Cellular distribution and phototoxicity of benzoporphyrin derivative and Photofrin.

N Rousset1, V Vonarx, S Eléouet, J Carré, L Bourré, Y Lajat, T Patrice.   

Abstract

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) induces cell-membrane damage and alterations in cancer-cell adhesiveness, an important parameter in cancer metastasis. These alterations result from cell sensitivity to photosensitizers and the distribution of photosensitizers in cells. The efficacy of photosensitizers depends on their close proximity to targets and thus on their pharmacokinetics at the cellular level. We studied the cellular distribution of photosensitizers with a confocal microspectrofluorimeter by analysing the fluorescence emitted by benzoporphyrin derivative-monoacid ring A (BPD-MA) and Photofrin relative to their cell sensitivity. Two cancer cell lines of colonic origin, but with different metastatic properties, were used: PROb (progressive) and REGb (regressive). For BPD-MA (1.75 microg/ml), maximal fluorescence intensity (8,300 cts) was reached after 2 h for PROb and after 1 h (4,900 cts) for REGb. For Photofrin (10 microg/ml), maximal fluorescence intensity (467 cts) was reached after 5 h for PROb and after 3 h (404 cts) for REGb. Intracellular studies revealed stronger cytoplasmic than nuclear fluorescence for both BPD and Photofrin. Both of the sensitizers induced a dose-dependent phototoxicity; LD50 with BPD-MA was 93.3 ng/ml for PROb and 71.1 ng/ml for REGb, under an irradiation of 10 J/cm2. With Photofrin, LD50 was 1,270 ng/ml for PROb and 1,200 ng/ml for REGb under an irradiation of 25 J/cm2. The photosensitizer effect within PROb and REGb cancer cells was assessed by incorporation kinetics and toxicity-phototoxicity tests. The intracellular concentration of the photosensitive agent was one important factor in the effectiveness of PDT, but not the only one contributing to the photodynamic effect. In conclusion, this study showed that there was a clear difference between sensitizer uptake and phototoxicity, even in cancer cells of the same origin. This could induce cell-killing heterogeneity in clinics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10945652     DOI: 10.1007/s004339900044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Exp Med (Berl)        ISSN: 0300-9130


  6 in total

1.  Toxicity of photodynamic therapy with LED associated to Photogem®: an in vivo study.

Authors:  Flávia Zardo Trindade; Ana Cláudia Pavarina; Ana Paula Dias Ribeiro; Vanderlei Salvador Bagnato; Carlos Eduardo Vergani; Carlos Alberto de Souza Costa
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2011-04-06       Impact factor: 3.161

2.  Photodynamic effects of zinc oxide nanowires in skin cancer and fibroblast.

Authors:  Muhammad Fakhar-e-Alam; S Kishwar; M Willander
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 3.  Spotlight on verteporfin in subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation.

Authors:  Susan J Keam; Lesley J Scott; Monique P Curran
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 4.  Verteporfin : a review of its use in the management of subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation.

Authors:  Susan J Keam; Lesley J Scott; Monique P Curran
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 9.546

5.  Photodynamic therapy by lysosomal-targeted drug delivery using talaporfin sodium incorporated into inactivated virus particles.

Authors:  Sharmin Akter; Mizuho Inai; Sachiko Saito; Norihiro Honda; Hisanao Hazama; Tomoyuki Nishikawa; Yasufumi Kaneda; Kunio Awazu
Journal:  Laser Ther       Date:  2019-12-31

6.  Treatment of canine osseous tumors with photodynamic therapy: a pilot study.

Authors:  S Burch; C London; B Seguin; C Rodriguez; B C Wilson; S K Bisland
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-01-22       Impact factor: 4.176

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.