Literature DB >> 9406705

Radiobiologic studies of radioimmunotherapy and external beam radiotherapy in vitro and in vivo in human renal cell carcinoma xenografts.

S Ning1, K Trisler, B W Wessels, S J Knox.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that the radiobiologic characteristics of in vitro survival curves are important determinants of the response of tumors to both conventional radiotherapy and radioimmunotherapy (RIT). The purpose of this study was to elucidate the relationship between in vitro radiation survival curve parameters and the relative sensitivity of tumor to RIT, exponentially decreasing low dose rate (ED LDR) irradiation and conventional high dose rate (HDR) fractionated external beam radiotherapy.
METHODS: Two human renal cell carcinoma cell lines, Caki-1 and A498, were used in vitro and nude mouse xenograft studies. HDR external beam gamma irradiation (dose rate, 430 centigray [cGy]/minute) and ED LDR irradiation (initial dose rate, 22-25 cGy/hour) were performed with a cesium-137 (137Cs) gamma irradiator. RIT was carried out with yttrium-90 (90Y-labeled monoclonal antibody NR-LU-10, and the absorbed radiation doses were calculated by medical internal radiation dose methodology. A clonogenic assay was used to generate radiation survival curves, and a computer FIT program was used to calculate the radiobiologic parameters. The antitumor efficacy of the different treatments was compared in vivo using a tumor regrowth delay assay in these two tumor xenograft models.
RESULTS: The radiation survival curves showed that the Caki-1 cell line was more sensitive to both HDR and ED LDR irradiation than A498 in vitro. The Caki-1 cell line, compared with A498, had a larger alpha (0.39 vs. 0.15 Gy following HDR and 0.32 vs. 0.21 Gy following ED LDR) and alpha-to-beta ratio (6.92 vs. 2.60 Gy for HDR and 40.0 vs. 19.2 Gy for ED LDR), a smaller n number (5.13 vs. 23 for HDR and 1.16 vs. 3.53 for ED LDR), a lower quasi-threshold dose (Dq) (1.60 vs. 3.15 Gy for HDR and 0.35 vs. 1.76 Gy for ED LDR), and a lower surviving fraction at 2 Gy (SF2) (0.37 vs. 0.60 for HDR and 0.51 vs. 0.61 for ED LDR), suggesting that Caki-1, compared with A498, had a steep initial slope and a small shoulder. The final slope represented by the beta value and D0 dose (the dose (Gy) required to reduce the fraction of surviving cells of 37% of its previous value in the exponential region of the survival curves) did not vary significantly between these two cell lines at either HDR or ED LDR irradiation. Tumor volume doubling times were 4.0 +/- 1.5 days for Caki-1 and 4.2 +/- 1.8 days for A498 tumor xenografts. One hundred microCi/50 microg of 90Y-labeled, isotype-matched irrelevant monoclonal antibody CCOO16-3 produced a tumor growth delay time (TGD) of 2.1 days in Caki-1 tumors but had no effect on A498 tumors (P < 0.05). RIT with 100 microCi of 90Y-NR-LU-10 resulted in a TGD of 4.8 days for Caki-1 tumors, whereas 100 microCi and 150 microCi of 90Y-NR-LU-10 produced a TGD of 1.9 and 2.7 days for A498 tumors, respectively. Estimated absorbed doses were 21.9 Gy in Caki-1 tumors treated with 100 microCi of 90Y-NR-LU-10 and 14.5 Gy and 21.8 Gy in A498 tumors treated with 100 microCi and 150 microCi of 90Y-NR-LU-10, respectively. The weighted normal tissue absorbed doses were 7.4 Gy for Caki-1 tumor-bearing mice and 9.0 Gy for A498 tumor-bearing mice (P > 0.05). To compare the responses of Caki-1 and A498 xenografts to RIT with external beam ED LDR and HDR irradiation, tumor-bearing mice were treated with equivalent doses (20-22 Gy) of 1) RIT with 90Y-NR-LU-10 (100 microCi for Caki-1 and 150 microCi for A498), 2) continuous ED LDR 137Cs irradiation with a initial dose rate of 22 cGy/hour, or 3) HDR X-irradiation (2 Gy x 10 fractions in 2 weeks). The TGDs produced by RIT, ED LDR, and HDR were 5.3, 9.7, and 8.3 days for Caki-1 and 2.7, 5.1, and 5.8 days for A498. The relative efficacy of RIT in these xenograft models correlated well with the radiobiologic parameters (i.e., the size of the initial slope and shoulder) of in vitro survival curves following HDR and ED LDR irradiation in these cell lines. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9406705     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19971215)80:12+<2519::aid-cncr26>3.3.co;2-t

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  33 in total

Review 1.  Radiotherapy for renal cell carcinoma: renaissance of an overlooked approach.

Authors:  Shankar Siva; Gargi Kothari; Alexander Muacevic; Alexander V Louie; Ben J Slotman; Bin S Teh; Simon S Lo
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  Stereotactic body radiotherapy for the treatment of medically inoperable primary renal cell carcinoma: Current evidence and future directions.

Authors:  Anand Swaminath; William Chu
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 3.  Clinical radioimmunotherapy--the role of radiobiology.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Pouget; Isabelle Navarro-Teulon; Manuel Bardiès; Nicolas Chouin; Guillaume Cartron; André Pèlegrin; David Azria
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 4.  Stereotactic body radiotherapy for renal cell cancer and pancreatic cancer : Literature review and practice recommendations of the DEGRO Working Group on Stereotactic Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Cédric Panje; Nikolaus Andratschke; Thomas B Brunner; Maximilian Niyazi; Matthias Guckenberger
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2016-10-24       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  Safety and Efficacy of Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma Extracranial Metastases.

Authors:  Chiachien Jake Wang; Alana Christie; Mu-Han Lin; Matthew Jung; Derek Weix; Lorel Huelsmann; Kristin Kuhn; Jeffrey Meyer; Neil Desai; D W Nathan Kim; Ivan Pedrosa; Vitaly Margulis; Jeffrey Cadeddu; Arthur Sagalowsky; Jeffrey Gahan; Aaron Laine; Xian-Jin Xie; Hak Choy; James Brugarolas; Robert Timmerman; Raquibul Hannan
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Stereotactic radiation therapy of renal cancer inferior vena cava tumor thrombus.

Authors:  Raquibul Hannan; Vitaly Margulis; Stephen G Chun; Nathan Cannon; D W Nathan Kim; Ramzi E Abdulrahman; Arthur Sagalowsky; Ivan Pedrosa; Hak Choy; James Brugarolas; Robert D Timmerman
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 4.742

7.  Intraoperative EBRT and resection for renal cell carcinoma : twenty-year outcomes.

Authors:  F A Calvo; C V Sole; R Martinez-Monge; I Azinovic; J Aristu; J Zudaire; J L Garcia-Sabrido; J M Berian
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-12-09       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 8.  Role of radiation therapy for renal tumors.

Authors:  Bhupesh Parashar; Kanhu Charan Patro; Michael Smith; Shruthi Arora; Dattatreyudu Nori; A Gabriella Wernicke
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.513

9.  Durable control of locally recurrent renal cell carcinoma using stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Authors:  Jillian Maclean; Rodney H Breau; Nicola Scheida; Shawn Malone
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2014-09-08

10.  High-dose-rate surface brachytherapy as a treatment option for renal cell carcinoma cutaneous metastases.

Authors:  Łukasz Raszewski; Artur J Chyrek; Magdalena Marciniak; Wojciech M Burchardt; Grzegorz M Biele da; Adam Chicheł
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2021-05-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.