| Literature DB >> 35205649 |
Abstract
(1) Background: Hyperthermia in oncology conventionally seeks the homogeneous heating of the tumor mass. The expected isothermal condition is the basis of the dose calculation in clinical practice. My objective is to study and apply a heterogenic temperature pattern during the heating process and show how it supports radiotherapy. (2)Entities:
Keywords: bioelectromagnetics; cellular selection; complexity; immune-effects; loco-regional hyperthermia; modulated electro-hyperthermia; oncology
Year: 2022 PMID: 35205649 PMCID: PMC8870118 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14040901
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Figure 1The two essential branches of electromagnetic LRHT methods. The majority of applications use the conventional focusing with isothermal intention. The method requests to measure the temperature as dose characterization. Heterogeneous (non-isothermal) heating is an emerging category of LRHT applications with nanoparticle insertion (mainly magnetic suspension). The heterogenic heating methods do not need direct temperature measurement. The dose measures the absorbed energy (J/kg = Ws/kg), so the tumor’s temperature develops by the heat-conduction from the targeted particles. The figure does not show the popular non-electromagnetic LRHT methods (e.g., HIPEC and HiFu).
The synergistic possibility shows a broad range of advantages for combined therapy of LRHT and RT.
| Tumor Characteristics | Oncological Hyperthermia Including All Technical Solutions | Synergy with Radiotherapy |
|---|---|---|
|
| Arrests the cycle of cells at the S stage, activates the malignant cell from its dormant (G0) phase making attack possible for chemo- and radio-therapies | Radiotherapy arrests the M/G2 stages of the cell cycle well completes the arrest |
|
| Kills cancer cells in an acidic environment (Hippocrates’ original idea) | It kills cancer cells in an alkaline environment, completes the cell desertion in all environmental conditions |
|
| Acts in the hypoxic state | Acts in an oxygenated state |
|
| Heated tumor mass increases the oxygen delivery | Makes strand breaks on DNA, the fixing of which means oxygen blocks the reparation |
Figure 2The heated focus rapidly spreads, so the temperature increases in a broader region. (a) The CEM43 dose depends on the isothermal areas, which differ by distance and develop by time. (b) The temperature distribution across the tumor after 64 min of treatment was measured by MRI (Pat.10. relapsed rectum carcinoma) [66].
Figure 3Challenges of temperature measurements: (a) the invasively inserted point sensors detect the very local temperature and not the average isothermal; (b) the semi-invasive temperature sensing catheters in lumens measure the temperature in near lumens, which could be far from the actual tumor temperature.
Figure 4Draft presentation of the heating paradigms: (a) Homogeneous mass heating trying to achieve isothermal conditions. It intensively heats the surrounding healthy tissues as well. (b) Selective, heterogeneous (heterothermal) heating. It creates a high temperature in the absorbing points, but mild average temperature (<40 °C) in the surrounding healthy tissue.
Figure 5The transmembrane proteins of malignant cells absorb the energy in thermal and nonthermal forms. The amplitude-modulated carrier frequency’s nonthermal effect gives the apoptotic signal pathway (see below in results). The carrier frequency delivers the modulated signal and selects the malignant cells, while the modulation with homeostatic autocorrelation (time-fractal) constrains the apoptotic pathway.
Figure 6The conceptual similarity of RT and mEHT. Both therapies target molecular bonds, so the primary energy absorption is heterogenic. The result is cellular degradation in various ways.
Figure 7The modulation process compromises between the contradictory high- and low-frequency demands. The unification of the low-frequency modulating signal and the high-frequency carrier forms the modulated signal, a frequency spectrum on the carrier 13.56 MHz. The cell membrane rectifies and works for the excitation of apoptotic pathways. The high-frequency carrier gives the optimal thermal condition for the excitation by the low-frequency info signal in the selected cells.
Figure 8The technical conditions of mEHT. The realization of the method rigorously accommodates and utilizes the complexity of the heterogenic impact of mEHT to arrest the proliferation of cancer and degrade the developed tumor cells.
Figure 9The calibration of the thermal factor of mEHT. (a) The homogeneous HT (water-bath hyperthermia, wHT) is used to calibrate apoptosis. The mEHT causes effective apoptosis at 42 °C, corresponding to the calibration at 5 °C higher (HepG2 cell-line) [133]. The mEHT affects the rafts on the cell-membrane with a 5 °C higher temperature than the average medium indicates. (b) Another calibration measurement with the U937 cell line [95,136]. The mEHT shows a >3 °C temperature difference in apoptotic efficacy at all measured points.
The table refers only to the clinical results obtained with mEHT complementary to RT or ChRT.
| No. | Tumor Site | Number of Patients | Treatment Used | Results | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Advanced gliomas | 12 | mEHT + RT + ChT | CR = 1, PR = 2, RR = 25%. Median duration of response = 10 m. Median survival = 9 m, 25% survival rate at 1 year. | Fiorentini, et al., 2006 [ |
| 2 | Various brain-gliomas | 140 | mEHT + RT + ChT | OS = 20.4 m. mEHT was safe and well tolerated. | Sahinbas, et al., 2007 [ |
| 3 | High-grade gliomas | 179 | mEHT + RT + ChT | Longstanding complete and partial remissions after recurrence in both groups. | Hager, et al., 2008 [ |
| 4 | Glioblastoma & Astrocytoma | 149 | mEHT + RT + ChT (BSC, palliative range) | 5y-OS = 83% (AST) in mEHT vs. 5y-OS = 25% by BSC. 5y-OS = 3.5% in mEHT vs. 5y-OS = 1.2% by BSC for GBM. Median OS = 14 m of mEHT for GBM and OS = 16.5 m for AST. | Fiorentini, et al., 2019b [ |
| 5 | Advanced cervical cancer | 236 | Random. Phase III (RT + ChT ± mEHT [preliminary data] | Preliminary data for the first 100 participants. A positive trend in survival and local disease control by mEHT. There were no significant differences in acute adverse events or quality of life between the groups. | Minnaar, et al., 2016 [ |
| 6 | Advanced cervical cancer | 72 | mEHT + RT + ChT | CR + PR = 73.5%; SD = 14.7%. The addition of mEHT increased the QoL and OS. | Pesti, et al., 2013 [ |
| 7 | Advanced cervical carcinoma | 20 | mEHT + RT + ChT | mEHT increases the peri-tumor temperature and blood flow in human cervical tumors, promoting the radiotherapy + chemotherapy | Lee, et al., 2018 [ |
| 8 | Advanced cervical carcinoma | 206 | Random. Phase III (RT + ChT ± mEHT) [abscopal effect] | The abscopal effect grows significantly with mEHT complementary to ChRT. | Minnaar, et al., 2020 [ |
| 9 | Advanced cervical carcinoma | 206 | Random. Phase III (RT + ChT ± mEHT) [toxicity & Quality of life] | mEHT does not increase the toxicity of ChRT but increases the quality of life | Minnaar, et al., 2020 [ |
| 10 | Advanced cervical carinoma | 202 | mEHT + RT + ChT | Six-month local disease-free survival (LDFS) = 38.6% for mEHT and LDFS = 19.8% without mEHT ( | Minnaar, et al., 2019 [ |
| 11 | Advanced NSCLC | 97 | mEHT + RT + ChT | Median OS = 9.4 m with mEHT OS = 5.6 m without mEHT; ( | Ou, et al., 2020 [ |
| 12 | Advanced NSCLC | 311 (61 +197 +53) | mEHT + RT + ChT | Two centers PFY (n = 61), HTT (n = 197) control (n = 53). 80% (PFY), 80% (HTT) had distant metastases, conventional therapies failed. Median OS = 16.4 m (PFY), 15.6 m (HTT), 14 m (control); 1st y survival 67.2% (PFY), 64% (HTT), 26.5% (control). | Dani, et al., 2011 + Szasz, 2014 [ |
| 13 | Advanced rectal cancer | 76 | mEHT + RT + ChT | Downstaging + tumor regression, ypT0, and ypN0 were better with mEHT than without. No statistical significance. | You et al., 2020 [ |
| 14 | Various types of sarcoma | 13 | mEHT + RT + ChT | Primary, recurrent, and metastatic sarcomas responded to mEHT, the masses regressed. | Jeung, et al., 2015 [ |
| 15 | Advanced pancreas carcinoma | 106 | mEHT + RT + ChT | After 3 m, PR = 22 (64.7%), SD = 10 (29.4%), PD = 2 (8.3%) with mEHT after 3 m of the therapy. In group without mEHT in the same time: PR = 3 (8.3%), SD = 10 (27.8%), PD = 23 (34.3%). The median OS = 18 m with mEHT and OS = 10.9 m without mEHT. | Fiorentini, et al., 2019 [ |
| 16 | Advanced pancreas carcinoma | 133 (26 +73 +34) | mEHT + RT + ChT | Two centers PFY (n = 26), HTT (n = 73) control (n = 34). 59% (PFY), 88% (HTT) had distant metastases, conventional therapies failed. Median OS = 12.0 m (PFY), 12.7 m (HTT), 6.5 m (control); 1st y survival 46.2% (PFY), 52.1% (HTT), 26.5% (control) QoL was improved. | Dani, et al., 2008 [ |
| 17 | Metastatic cancers (colorectal, ovarian, breast) | 23 | mEHT + RT + ChT | OS and time to progression (TTP) were influenced by the number of chemotherapy cycles ( | Ranieri, et al., 2017 [ |
| 18 | Rectal cancer | 120 | mEHT + RT + surgery | In mEHT group, 80.7% showed down-staging compared with 67.2% in non-mEHT group. | Kim et al., 2021 [ |
| 19 | Gliomas | 164 | mEHT + RT + ChT | CR + PR is 41.4% for mEHT and 33.4% for conventional therapies. | Fiorentini et al., 2020 [ |
| 20 | Ovarian, cervical cancer | mEHT + RT + ChT | The feasibility and success of oncothermia is proven. | Wookyeom, et al., 2018 [ | |
| 21 | Various sites | 784 | mEHT + RT + ChT + surgery | Preliminary results show promising survival trajectories. mEHT is a safe treatment with very few adverse events or side effects, allowing patients to maintain a higher quality of life. | Parmar et al., 2020 [ |
| 22 | Various sites | mEHT + RT + ChT | Planned trial. | Arrojo et al., 2020 [ | |
| 23 | Various sites | mEHT + RT + ChT | The feasibility and success of oncothermia are proven. | Szasz AM et al., 2019 [ | |
| 24 | Advanced glioblastoma | 60 | mEHT + RT + ChT | No added toxicity by immunotherapy. Median progression-free survival (PFS) = 13 m. Median follow-up 17 m, median OS was not reached. The estimated OS at 30 m was 58%. | Van Gool, et al., 2018 [ |
| 25 | Different types of metastatic/recurrent cancers | 33 | mEHT + RT | CR = 2 (6.1%), Very good PR = 5 (15.2%), PR = 13 (39.4%), SD = 9 (27.3%), PD = 4 (12.1%). Three patients (9.1%) developed autoimmune toxicities. All these three patients had long-lasting abscopal responses outside the irradiated area. | Chi, et al., 2020 [ |
Figure 10The effect of heating and maintaining the temperature on apoptosis. The mEHT had significantly higher apoptotic cells than the wHT at the same temperature. (a) The apoptosis saturated when the temperature became constant at the temperature maintenance period of treatment. (b) The temperature dependence of apoptosis shows a limit at the saturated temperature.
Figure 11The apoptosis linearly increases by the increase of current density. The higher current density was reached by intensive cooling of the sample, keeping the medium at 36 °C, while the standard treatment was at 41 °C. The difference in the approximated apoptosis at low current at 36 and at 41 °C is produced by the thermal effect.
Figure 12The measured thermal and nonthermal effects of mEHT. The thermal effect has an Arrhenius character, while the nonthermal effects are quantum-mechanical, promoting enzymatic processes, pushing through the transitional state. The nonthermal processes use the thermal conditions for optimal reaction rates. (For details, see in the text.). The * denotes metastable transitional state.
Figure 13The negative feedback structure of the abscopal effect shows a complex loop from recognizing the antigens to their use in tumor-specific immune processes. The experiments are from various publications. The loop summary only demonstrates how the loop works. The measurements are from the following publications: the selection line reviewed [101], TRAIL-R2-FAS-FADD complex [153]; apoptosis [133,150], ICD [305]; DAMP [174], APC [163] immune [172], NK, Granzyme [169], IFN- [182], CD3+, CD8+ [163,170].
Figure 14The processes of thermal and nonthermal effects of selective, heterogenic heating. The field-induced actions are complex, requiring both the thermal (conditional) and nonthermal (excitation) processes.
The essential addition of mEHT to the synergistic RT-with-hyperthermia methods.
| Synergistic Addition of Modulated Electrohyperthermia | |
|---|---|
|
| Selects malignant cells and nonthermally excites, marginal heating of the healthy cells renders less vulnerable to ionizing radiation |
|
| Mostly natural apoptosis, no inflammation, no large cytokine liberation, no extra injury current, no extra pH hypoxia |
|
| Immunogenic processes, abscopal effect. Both the innate and adaptive immune system are activated, vaccination facility (patented) |
|
| Harmonized with homeostatic controls, the temperature increase in the nuclei is moderate, does not make an additional enzymatic activity for reparation |
|
| Lower incident power puts less load on the skin, which is anyway irritated by radiotherapy, so the synergy has fewer adverse effects |
|
| Improves quality of life by reducing side effects |
|
| Possible to combine with radiotherapy in localizations which were not possible with radiative hyperthermia (like the brain) |
|
| Resensitizes to radiotherapy in highly metastatic advanced refractory cases, when conventional therapies are ineffective |
|
| mEHT is applicable as a chronic treatment for as long as is necessary with radiotherapy complementation |
|
| mEHT is applicable with most comorbidities as well as in combination with any other oncotherapies |
Figure 15The major differences between isothermal and selective paradigm heating are listed in the columns.