| Literature DB >> 24223628 |
Shobu Watanabe1, Norihisa Nitta, Akinaga Sonoda, Ayumi Nitta-Seko, Shinichi Ohta, Keiko Tsuchiya, Hideji Otani, Yuki Tomozawa, Yukihiro Nagatani, Kenichi Mukaisho, Masashi Takahashi, Kiyoshi Murata.
Abstract
In a rabbit model of bleomycin-induced lung injury, computed tomography (CT) and pathological studies were conducted to investigate whether the progression of this injury is inhibited by pirfenidone and by triple therapy with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin. We divided nine rabbits with bleomycin-induced lung injury into three equally sized groups. Group 1 served as the control, group 2 received pirfenidone alone and group 3 was treated with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin. Multidetector CT (MDCT) scans were acquired immediately after the administration of bleomycin, and further scans were performed on days 14 and 28. The area of abnormal opacity was calculated. The rabbit lungs were removed and the size of abnormal areas in macroscopic specimens was calculated and the degree of fibrosis and inflammation in microscopic specimens was scored. In order, the average size of the area of abnormal opacity on CT scans was largest in group 1, followed by groups 2 and 3. On day 28, the area of opacity was significantly smaller in group 3 than in group 1 (P=0.071). The average size of the area of abnormal opacity on macroscopic findings was largest in group 1, followed in order by groups 2 and 3; the difference between group 1 and 3 was significant (P<0.05). The average fibrosis score was highest in group 3 followed by groups 2 and 1. By contrast, the average inflammation score was highest in group 2 followed by groups 1 and 3. Although the administration of pirfenidone alone slowed the progression of bleomycin-induced lung injury, the triple-drug combination was more effective.Entities:
Keywords: anticancer drug; bleomycin; combined administration; monotherapy; reactive oxygen species
Year: 2013 PMID: 24223628 PMCID: PMC3820844 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2013.1308
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Ther Med ISSN: 1792-0981 Impact factor: 2.447
Figure 1.Effect of different treatments on the abnormal area, as measured using computed tomography (CT). The area of abnormal shadow in group 1 was the largest of the three groups and the area of abnormal shadow in group 3 was the smallest of the three groups. On day 28, the area of abnormal shadow in group 1 was markedly higher compared with that in group 3 (P=0.071). Group 1, control; group 2, monotherapy with pirfenidone; group 3, triple therapy with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin.
Effect of different treatments on the size of the abnormal area, as measured using CT (mm2).
| Group | Rabbit 1 | Rabbit 2 | Rabbit 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Day 14 | |||
| Group 1 | 5,255.63 | 1,849.79 | 9,151.77 |
| Group 2 | 6,460.87 | 6,497.77 | 1,863.44 |
| Group 3 | 3,546.37 | 2,865.62 | 2,484.55 |
| Day 28 | |||
| Group 1 | 2,711.62 | 10,062.89 | 6,998.04 |
| Group 2 | 3,276.21 | 3,310.37 | 937.38 |
| Group 3 | 1,748.98 | 1,589.65 | 798.37 |
Group 1, control; group 2, monotherapy with pirfenidone; group 3, triple therapy with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin. CT, computed tomography.
Figure 2.Size of abnormal area in macroscopic specimens. The largest macroscopic abnormal area in the pathological specimens was in group 1, followed by groups 2 and 3. There was a significant difference between groups 1 and 3 (P<0.05) and a marked difference between groups 1 and 2 (P= 0.09). Moreover, there was no significant difference between groups 2 and 3. Group 1, control; group 2, monotherapy with pirfenidone; group 3, triple therapy with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin.
Size of the abnormal area in the macroscopic pathology image of each group (μm2).
| Group | Rabbit 1 | Rabbit 2 | Rabbit 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | 271647.5 | 319624.5 | 110117.3 |
| Group 2 | 115202.5 | 61994.0 | 128822.8 |
| Group 3 | 144483.3 | 67646.3 | 49180.5 |
Group 1, control; group 2, monotherapy with pirfenidone; group 3, triple therapy with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin.
Figure 3.Microscopic findings. (A) Fibrosis score; (B) Inflammation score. Microscopic findings in pathological specimens revealed the average fibrosis score was the highest in group 1, followed by groups 2 and 3. The highest average inflammation score was in group 2, followed by groups 1 and 3. There were no significant differences among the three groups. Group 1, control; group 2, monotherapy with pirfenidone; group 3, triple therapy with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin.
Microscopic findings (fibrosis and inflammation score).
| Scores | Rabbit 1 | Rabbit 2 | Rabbit 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fibrosis score | |||
| Group 1 | 7.75 | 2.75 | 1.25 |
| Group 2 | 2.25 | 4.75 | 3.00 |
| Group 3 | 2.75 | 1.50 | 3.25 |
| Inflammation score | |||
| Group 1 | 10.00 | 4.75 | 5.25 |
| Group 2 | 4.50 | 8.75 | 10.00 |
| Group 3 | 4.50 | 3.75 | 5.25 |
Group 1, control; group 2, monotherapy with pirfenidone; group 3, triple therapy with pirfenidone, edaravone and erythropoietin.