Dataset Information

Apigenin Enhanced Radiation-Induced Apoptosis/Necrosis by Sensitization of LNCaP Prostate Cancer Cells to 6 MV Photon Beams.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Whereas prostate cancer (PrCa) may be unresponsive or moderately responsive to radiation therapy (RT)- most common modality for treatment of PrCa- patients must receive a high dose of RT In order to achieve appropriate tumour control. However, this increase in radiation dose may lead to severe adverse effects in normal tissues. Sensitization of PrCa to radiation provides an alternate approach to improve the therapeutic efficacy of RT. This study aims to assess the radiosensitisation effect of apigenin (Api) on a prostate cancer cell line (LNCaP).

Materials and methods

In this experimental study, LNCaP cells were treated with 0-80 μM Api to investigate its effect on LNCaP cell viability and determine its half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀). Next, the cells were divided into four groups: i. Control, ii. Cells treated with the IC₅₀ concentration of Api, iii. Cells treated with 2 Gy ionizing radiation (IR), and cells co-treated with Api and IR. The 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and an Annexin V-FITC/PI assay were performed to assess cell survival, Bax and Bcl-2 expressions, and presence of apoptosis and necrosis.

Results

Api inhibited cell survival in a dose-dependent, but not time-dependent manner. Cells treated with Api had increased amounts of early apoptosis, late apoptosis, and secondary necrosis compared to the control group. This group also had decreased Bcl-2 gene expression and up-regulated Bax gene expression. Co-treatment with Api and IR significantly inhibited cell survival, and increased early apoptosis, late apoptosis and secondary necrosis compared to the other groups. There was a significant decrease in Bcl-2 gene expression along with up-regulation of Bax gene expression, and Bax/Bcl-2 ratio changes that favoured apoptosis.

Conclusion

Api inhibited PrCa cell survival and induced apoptosis as a single agent. In addition, Api significantly sensitized the LNCaP cells to IR and enhanced radiation-induced apoptosis.

SUBMITTER: Taghavi Bahreghani M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8753104 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:In this study, we assessed the differences in the dose distribution of a 4 MV photon beam among different calculation algorithms: the Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm, the analytic anisotropic algorithm (AAA), and the pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm (ver. 11.0.31), in phantoms and in clinical intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans. Homogeneous and heterogeneous, including middle-, low-, and high-density, phantoms were combined to assess the percentage depth dose and lateral dose profiles among AXB, AAA, and PBC. For the phantom containing the low-density area, AXB was in agreement with measurement within 0.5%, while the greatest differences between the AAA and PBC calculations and measurement were 2.7% and 3.6%, respectively. AXB showed agreement with measurement within 2.5% at the high-density area, while AAA and PBC overestimated the dose by more than 4.5% and 4.0%, respectively. Furthermore, 15 IMRT plans, calculated using AXB, for oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, and laryngeal carcinomas were analyzed. The dose prescription was 70 Gy to 50% of the planning target volume (PTV70). Subsequently, each plan was recalculated using AAA and PBC while maintaining the AXB-calculated monitor units, leaf motion, and beam arrangement. Additionally, nine hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancer patients were analyzed in terms of PTV70 for cartilaginous structures (PTV(70_cartilage)). The doses covering 50% to PTV70 calculated by AAA and PBC were 2.1% ± 1.0% and 3.7% ± 0.8% significantly higher than those using AXB, respectively (p < 0.01). The increases in doses to PTV(70_cartilage) calculated by AAA and PBC relative to AXB were 3.9% and 5.3% on average, respectively, and were relatively greater than those in the entire PTV70. AXB was found to be in better agreement with measurement in phantoms in heterogeneous areas for the 4 MV photon beam. Considering AXB as the standard, AAA and PBC overestimated the IMRT dose for head and neck cancer. The dosimetric differences should not be ignored, particularly with cartilaginous structures in PTV.

Project description:IntroductionThis study presents an empirical method to model the high-energy photon beam percent depth dose (PDD) curve by using the home-generated buildup function and tail function (buildup-tail function) in radiation therapy. The modeling parameters n and μ of buildup-tail function can be used to characterize the Collimator Scatter Factor (Sc) either in a square field or in the different individual upper jaw and lower jaw setting separately for individual monitor unit check.Methods and materialsThe PDD curves for four high-energy photon beams were modeled by the buildup and tail function in this study. The buildup function was a quadratic function in the form of [Formula: see text] with the main parameter of d (depth in water) and n, while the tail function was in the form of e-μd and was composed by an exponential function with the main parameter of d and μ. The PDD was the product of buildup and tail function, PDD = [Formula: see text]. The PDD of four-photon energies was characterized by the buildup-tail function by adjusting the parameters n and μ. The Sc of 6 MV and 10 MV can then be expressed simply by the modeling parameters n and μ.ResultsThe main parameters n increases in buildup-tail function when photon energy increased. The physical meaning of the parameter n expresses the beam hardening of photon energy in PDD. The fitting results of parameters n in the buildup function are 0.17, 0.208, 0.495, 1.2 of four-photon energies, 4 MV, 6 MV, 10 MV, 18 MV, respectively. The parameter μ can be treated as attenuation coefficient in tail function and decreases when photon energy increased. The fitting results of parameters μ in the tail function are 0.065, 0.0515, 0.0458, 0.0422 of four-photon energies, 4 MV, 6 MV, 10 MV, 18 MV, respectively. The values of n and μ obtained from the fitted buildup-tail function were applied into an analytical formula of Sc = nE(S)0.63μE to get the collimator to scatter factor Sc for 6 and 10 MV photon beam, while nE, μE, S denotes n, μ at photon energy E of field size S, respectively. The calculated Sc were compared with the measured data and showed agreement at different field sizes to within ±1.5%.ConclusionsWe proposed a model incorporating a two-parameter formula which can improve the fitting accuracy to be better than 1.5% maximum error for describing the PDD in different photon energies used in clinical setting. This model can be used to parameterize the Sc factors for some clinical requirements. The modeling parameters n and μ can be used to predict the Sc in either square field or individual jaws opening asymmetrically for treatment monitor unit double-check in dose calculation. The technique developed in this study can also be used for systematic or random errors in the QA program, thus improves the clinical dose computation accuracy for patient treatment.