4.7 Article

TUMOR CELL RESPONSE TO SYNCHROTRON MICROBEAM RADIATION THERAPY DIFFERS MARKEDLY FROM CELLS IN NORMAL TISSUES

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.01.035

Keywords

Microbeam radiation therapy; Cellular response; EMT-6; Gamma-H2AX; Synchrotron

Funding

  1. Cancer Council Victoria Venture
  2. Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO)
  3. Monash University
  4. National Breast Cancer Foundation
  5. Cancer Research UK [C14504/A6116]
  6. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [143805]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: High-dose synchrotron microbeam radiation therapy (MRT) can be effective at destroying tumors in animal models while causing very little damage to normal tissues. The aim of this study was to investigate the cellular processes behind this observation of potential clinical importance. Methods and Materials: MRT was performed using a lattice of 25 mu m-wide, planar, polychromatic, kilovoltage X-ray microbeams, with 200-mu m peak separation. Inoculated EMT-6.5 tumor and normal mouse skin tissues were harvested at defined intervals post-MRT. Immunohistochemical detection of gamma-H2AX allowed precise localization of irradiated cells, which were also assessed for proliferation and apoptosis. Results: MRT significantly reduced tumor cell proliferation by 24 h post-irradiation (p = 0.002). An unexpected finding was that within 24 h of MRT, peak and valley irradiated zones were indistinguishable in tumors because of extensive cell migration between the zones. This was not seen in MRT-treated normal skin, which appeared to undergo a coordinated repair response. MRT elicited an increase in median survival times of EMT-6.5 and 67NR tumor-inoculated mice similar to that achieved with conventional radiotherapy, while causing markedly less normal tissue damage. Conclusions: This study provides evidence of a differential response at a cellular level between normal and tumor tissues after synchrotron MRT. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available