31P magnetic resonance spectroscopy as a predictor of efficacy in photodynamic therapy using differently charged zinc phthalocyanines

被引:12
作者
Bremner, JCM
Wood, SR
Bradley, JK
Griffiths, J
Adams, GE
Brown, SB [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leeds, Sch Biochem & Mol Biol, Leeds LS2 9JT, W Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Leeds, Dept Colour Chem & Dyeing, Leeds LS2 9JT, W Yorkshire, England
[3] Univ Leeds, Ctr Photobiol & Photodynam Therapy, Leeds LS2 9JT, W Yorkshire, England
[4] MRC, Radiobiol Unit, Didcot OX11 0RD, Oxon, England
关键词
photodynamic therapy; magnetic resonance; phthalocyanines;
D O I
10.1038/sj.bjc.6690738
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a developing approach to the treatment of solid tumours which requires the combined action of light and a photosensitizing drug in the presence of adequate levels of molecular oxygen. We have developed a novel series of photosensitizers based on zinc phthalocyanine which are water-soluble and contain neutral (TDEPC), positive (PPC) and negative (TCPC) side-chains. The PDT effects of these sensitizers have been studied in a mouse model bearing the RIF-1 murine fibrosarcoma line studying tumour regrowth delay, phosphate metabolism by magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) and blood flow, using D2O uptake and MRS. The two main aims of the study were to determine ii MRS measurements made at the time of PDT treatment could potentially be predictive of ultimate PDT efficacy and to assess the effects of sensitizer charge on PDT in this model. It was clearly demonstrated that there is a relationship between MRS measurements during and immediately following PDT and the ultimate effect on the tumour. For all three drugs, tumour regrowth delay was greater with a 1-h time interval between drug and light administration than with a 24-h interval. In both cases, the order of tumour regrowth delay was PPC > TDEPC = TCPC (though the data at 24 h were not statistically significant). Correspondingly, there were greater effects on phosphate metabolism (measured at the time of PDT or soon after) for the 1-h than for the 24-h time interval. Again effects were greatest with the cationic PPC, with the sequence being PPC > TDEPC > TCPC. A parallel sequence was observed for the blood flow effects, demonstrating that reduction in blood flow is an important factor in PDT with these sensitizers. (C) 1999 Cancer Research Campaign.
引用
收藏
页码:616 / 621
页数:6
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
BELLNIER DA, 1992, PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY, P117
[2]  
Ben-Hur E., 1992, PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY, P63
[3]   PHTHALOCYANINE PHOTOSENSITIZATION OF MAMMALIAN-CELLS - BIOCHEMICAL AND ULTRASTRUCTURAL EFFECTS [J].
BENHUR, E ;
GREEN, M ;
PRAGER, A ;
KOL, R ;
ROSENTHAL, I .
PHOTOCHEMISTRY AND PHOTOBIOLOGY, 1987, 46 (05) :651-656
[4]   THE ACCURACY AND REPRODUCIBILITY OF MEASURING BLOOD-FLOW IN MURINE TUMORS BY THE D2O UPTAKE AND CLEARANCE TECHNIQUES [J].
BRADLEY, JK ;
COUNSELL, CJR ;
BREMNER, JCM ;
SANSOM, JM ;
ADAMS, GE .
NMR IN BIOMEDICINE, 1994, 7 (03) :141-148
[5]   INVIVO P-31 NUCLEAR-MAGNETIC-RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY OF EXPERIMENTAL MURINE TUMORS AND HUMAN TUMOR XENOGRAFTS - EFFECTS OF BLOOD-FLOW MODIFICATION [J].
BREMNER, JCM ;
COUNSELL, CJR ;
ADAMS, GE ;
STRATFORD, IJ ;
WOOD, PJ ;
DUNN, JF ;
RADDA, GK .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1991, 64 (05) :862-866
[6]   MAGNETIC-RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPIC STUDIES ON REAL-TIME CHANGES IN RIF-1 TUMOR METABOLISM AND BLOOD-FLOW DURING AND AFTER PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY [J].
BREMNER, JCM ;
BRADLEY, JK ;
STRATFORD, IJ ;
ADAMS, GE .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1994, 69 (06) :1083-1087
[7]   P-31-NMR SPECTROSCOPY DEMONSTRATES DECREASED ATP LEVELS INVIVO AS AN EARLY RESPONSE TO PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY [J].
CECKLER, TL ;
BRYANT, RG ;
PENNEY, DP ;
GIBSON, SL ;
HILF, R .
BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS, 1986, 140 (01) :273-279
[8]  
CHAPMAN JD, 1991, J NATL CANCER I, V83, P1651
[9]  
CHOPP M, 1987, PHOTOCHEM PHOTOBIOL, V45, P819
[10]   The photodynamic response of two rodent tumour models to four zinc (II)-substituted phthalocyanines [J].
Cruse-Sawyer, JE ;
Griffiths, J ;
Dixon, B ;
Brown, SB .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1998, 77 (06) :965-972