Dataset Information

Differential response of esophageal cancer cells to particle irradiation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Radiation therapy is a mainstay in the treatment of esophageal cancer (EC) patients, and photon radiotherapy has proved beneficial both in the neoadjuvant and the definitive setting. However, regarding the still poor prognosis of many EC patients, particle radiation employing a higher biological effectiveness may help to further improve patient outcomes. However, the influence of clinically available particle radiation on EC cells remains largely unknown.

Methods

Patient-derived esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell cancer lines were treated with photon and particle irradiation using clinically available proton (¹H), carbon (¹²C) or oxygen (¹⁶O) beams at the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center. Histology-dependent clonogenic survival was calculated for increasing physical radiation doses, and resulting relative biological effectiveness (RBE) was calculated for each radiation modality. Cell cycle effects caused by photon and particle radiation were assessed, and radiation-induced apoptosis was measured in adenocarcinoma and squamous cell EC samples by activated caspase-3 and sub-G1 populations. Repair kinetics of DNA double strand breaks induced by photon and particle radiation were investigated.

Results

While both adenocarcinoma EC cell lines demonstrated increasing sensitivities for ¹H, ¹²C and ¹⁶O radiation, the two squamous cell carcinoma lines exhibited a more heterogeneous response to photon and particle treatment; average RBE values were calculated as 1.15 for ¹H, 2.3 for ¹²C and 2.5 for ¹⁶O irradiation. After particle irradiation, squamous cell EC samples reacted with an increased and prolonged block in G2 phase of the cell cycle compared to adenocarcinoma cells. Particle radiation resulted in an incomplete repair of radiation-induced DNA double strand breaks in both adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma samples, with the levels of initial strand break induction correlating well with the individual cellular survival after photon and particle radiation. Similarly, EC samples demonstrated heterogeneous levels of radiation-induced apoptosis that also corresponded to the observed cellular survival of individual cell lines.

Conclusions

Esophageal cancer cells exhibit differential responses to irradiation with photons and ¹H, ¹²C and ¹⁶O particles that were independent of tumor histology. Therefore, yet unknown molecular markers beyond histology may help to establish which esophageal cancer patients benefit from the biological effects of particle treatment.

SUBMITTER: Hartfiel S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6615091 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The growing number of particle treatment facilities worldwide and patients treated with particles instead of X-rays marks the upcoming rearrangement of modern radiotherapy. Especially for tumors being difficult to access and for tumors that are resistant to conventional X-ray treatment particle radiotherapy is a beneficial technology. At the Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT) patients are treated with this technology since 2009 as it offers clear benefits. Contrary to X-rays, which show an exponential dose decrease (after reaching electron equilibrium) with increasing tissue depth, charged particles deposit most of their energy to a small region within the tissue with a sharp dose fall-off after the so-called Bragg peak. This precise dose localization enables further dose escalation within the tumor while sparing healthy tissue. Besides physical advantages, particle radiotherapy offers additional biological advantages. In radiobiology, the term relative-biological effectiveness (RBE) is defined as the ratio of X-rays dose to an alternative irradiation modality dose which produce the same biological effect (e.g. survival or number of DSBs). While protons have a relative biological effectiveness (RBE) comparable to X-rays, carbon ions are more effective in inducing DNA damage(1, 2) and are therefore especially useful for radioresistant tumors. This is due to the fact, that carbon ions induce clustered and direct DNA damage, which is considered to be less dependent on cell cycle stage, oxygen level, genetic background and hinders DNA repair mechanisms(3–6). Nevertheless, their exact mode of action and cellular mechanisms are largely unknown. We show the first comprehensive proteomic and phosphoproteomic study elucidating the cellular response to treatment with protons, carbon ions and X-rays. We found that 2h after treatment with these radiations negligible regulation occurred at protein expression level. But 181 phosphorylation sites were deregulated by ionizing radiation contributing mainly to DNA damage response functionalities. Interestingly we found 55 phosphorylation sites being differentially regulated between the radiations. Here, we observed protons and carbon ions producing equal cellular response whereas X-rays show altered regulation for certain phosphorylation sites. A subset of 28 phosphorylation sites being involved in the DNA damage response or differentially regulated between the ionizing radiations was selected for result confirmation.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) and involved-field irradiation (IFI) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC) receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (nCRTS). MATERIAL AND METHODS:PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and major meetings were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared at least two of the following treatment regimens: nCRTS, neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery (nCTS), and surgery (S) alone. Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcomes of interest, reported as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare all regimens simultaneously. RESULTS:Twenty-nine RCTs with a total of 5212 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Both nCRTS adopting ENI (nCRTS-ENI) (HR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.48-0.83) and nCRTS adopting IFI (nCRTS-IFI) (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66-0.86) significantly improved OS compared to S alone. No significant differences in OS, locoregional recurrence, distant metastases, R0 resection and postoperative mortality were observed between nCRTS-ENI and nCRTS-IFI. In subgroup analyses, nCRTS-IFI showed a significant OS advantage over nCTS (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.96) and S alone (HR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.38-0.68) for esophagus squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but nCRTS-ENI did not; nCRTS-ENI using three-dimensional radiotherapy (3D-RT) resulted in an improved OS compared to that with 2D-RT (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.34-0.99). Based on treatment ranking in term of OS, nCRTS-IFI (0.90) and nCRTS-ENI (0.96) was ranked the most effective treatment for ESCC and esophagus adenocarcinoma (EAC), respectively. CONCLUSION:Either adopting ENI or IFI, nCRTS is likely to be the optimal treatment for resectable EC, and nCRTS-IFI and nCRTS-ENI seem to be more effective for patients with ESCC and EAC, respectively. Future head to head comparison trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Project description:BackgroundMicroRNAs (miRNAs), a group of short non-coding RNAs that negatively regulate gene expression, have recently emerged as potential modulators of cellular response to ionizing radiations both in vitro and in vivo in various cell types and tissues. However, in epidermal cells, the involvement of the miRNA machinery in the cellular response to ionizing radiations remains to be clarified. Indeed, understanding the mechanisms of cutaneous radiosensitivity is an important issue since skin is the most exposed organ to ionizing radiations and among the most sensitive.ResultsWe settled up an expression study of miRNAs in primary human skin keratinocytes using a microfluidic system of qPCR assay, which permits to assess the expression of almost 700 annotated miRNAs. The keratinocytes were cultured to a proliferative or a differentiated state mimicking basal or suprabasal layers of human epidermis. These cells were irradiated at 10 mGy or 6 Gy and RNA was extracted 3 hours after irradiation. We found that proliferative cells irradiated at 6 Gy display a global fall of miRNA expression whereas differentiated cells exposed to the same dose display a global increase of miRNAs expression. We identified twenty miRNAs weakly but significantly modulated after 6 Gy irradiation, whereas only 2 miRNAs were modulated after low-dose irradiation in proliferating cells. To go further into the biological meaning of this miRNA response, we over-expressed some of the responding miRNA in proliferating cells: we observed a significant decrease of cell viability 72 hours after irradiation. Functional annotation of their predicted targets revealed that G-protein related pathways might be regulated by these responding miRNAs.ConclusionsOur results reveal that human primary keratinocytes exposed to ionizing irradiation expressed a miRNA pattern strongly related to the differentiation status of irradiated cells. We also demonstrate that some miRNAs play a role in the radiation response to ensure the short-term survival of irradiated keratinocytes.

Project description:PurposeGiven the higher precision accompanied by optimized sparing of normal tissue, charged particle therapy was thought of as a promising treatment for pancreatic cancer. However, systematic preclinical studies were scarce. We aimed to investigate the radiobiological effects of charged particle irradiation on pancreatic cancer cell lines.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed in EMBASE (OVID), Medline (OVID), and Web of Science databases. Included studies were in vitro English publications that reported the radiobiological effects of charged particle irradiation on pancreatic cancer cells.ResultsThirteen carbon ion irradiation and seven proton irradiation in vitro studies were included finally. Relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values of carbon ion irradiation and proton irradiation in different human pancreatic cancer cell lines ranged from 1.29 to 4.5, and 0.6 to 2.1, respectively. The mean of the surviving fraction of 2 Gy (SF2) of carbon ion, proton, and photon irradiation was 0.18 ± 0.11, 0.48 ± 0.11, and 0.57 ± 0.13, respectively. Carbon ion irradiation induced more G2/M arrest and a longer-lasting expression of γH2AX than photon irradiation. Combination therapies enhanced the therapeutic effects of pancreatic cell lines with a mean standard enhancement ratio (SER) of 1.66 ± 0.63 for carbon ion irradiation, 1.55 ± 0.27 for proton irradiation, and 1.52 ± 0.30 for photon irradiation. Carbon ion irradiation was more effective in suppressing the migration and invasion than photon irradiation, except for the PANC-1 cells.ConclusionsCurrent in vitro evidence demonstrates that, compared with photon irradiation, carbon ion irradiation offers superior radiobiological effects in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Mechanistically, high-LET irradiation may induce complex DNA damage and ultimately promote genomic instability and cell death. Both carbon ion irradiation and proton irradiation confer similar sensitization effects in comparison with photon irradiation when combined with chemotherapy or targeted therapy.

Project description:BackgroundOver the last decade, several drugs that inhibit class I and/or class II histone deacetylases (HDACs) have been identified, including trichostatin A, the cyclic depsipeptide FR901228 and the antibiotic apicidin. These compounds have had immediate application in cancer research because of their ability to reactivate aberrantly silenced tumour suppressor genes and/or block tumour cell growth. Although a number of HDAC inhibitors are being evaluated in preclinical cancer models and in clinical trials, little is known about the differences in their specific mechanism of action and about the unique determinants of cancer cell sensitivity to each of these inhibitors.MethodsUsing a combination of cell viability assays, HDAC enzyme activity measurements, western blots for histone modifications, microarray gene expression analysis and qRT-PCR, we have characterised differences in trichostatin A vs depsipeptide-induced phenotypes in lung cancer, breast cancer and skin cancer cells and in normal cells and have then expanded these studies to other HDAC inhibitors.ResultsCell viability profiles across panels of lung cancer, breast cancer and melanoma cell lines showed distinct sensitivities to the pan-inhibitor TSA compared with the class 1 selective inhibitor depsipeptide. In several instances, the cell lines most sensitive to one inhibitor were most resistant to the other inhibitor, demonstrating these drugs act on at least some non-overlapping cellular targets. These differences were not explained by the HDAC selectivity of these inhibitors alone since apicidin, which is a class 1 selective compound similar to depsipeptide, also showed a unique drug sensitivity profile of its own. TSA had greater specificity for cancer vs normal cells compared with other HDAC inhibitors. In addition, at concentrations that blocked cancer cell viability, TSA effectively inhibited purified recombinant HDACs 1, 2 and 5 and moderately inhibited HDAC8, while depsipeptide did not inhibit the activity of purified HDACs in vitro but did in cellular extracts, suggesting a potentially indirect action of this drug. Although both depsipeptide and TSA increased levels of histone acetylation in cancer cells, only depsipeptide decreased global levels of transcriptionally repressive histone methylation marks. Analysis of gene expression profiles of an isogenic cell line pair that showed discrepant sensitivity to depsipeptide, suggested that resistance to this inhibitor may be mediated by increased expression of multidrug resistance genes triggered by exposure to chemotherapy as was confirmed by verapamil studies.ConclusionAlthough generally thought to have similar activities, the HDAC modulators trichostatin A and depsipeptide demonstrated distinct phenotypes in the inhibition of cancer cell viability and of HDAC activity, in their selectivity for cancer vs normal cells, and in their effects on histone modifications. These differences in mode of action may bear on the future therapeutic and research application of these inhibitors.