4.6 Article

In vivo evaluation of tumour acidosis for assessing the early metabolic response and onset of resistance to dichloroacetate by using magnetic resonance pH imaging

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY
卷 51, 期 2, 页码 498-506

出版社

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2017.4029

关键词

metabolism; dichloroacetate; MRI-CEST; breast cancer; tumour extracellular pH

类别

资金

  1. European Community [667510]
  2. Fondazione Umberto Veronesi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dichloroacetate (DCA) can reverse the glycolytic phenotype that is responsible of increased lactate production and extracellular pH acidification in cancer cells. Magnetic resonance imaging-chemical exchange saturation transfer (MRI-CEST) pH mapping is a novel non-invasive imaging approach that can measure in vivo extracellular tumour pH. We examined whether MRI-CEST pH mapping can monitor in vivo changes in tumour acidosis for assessing treatment response to DCA. Cell viability and extracellular pH were assessed in TS/A breast cancer cells treated with 1-10 mM DCA for 24 h in normoxia or hypoxia (1% O-2) conditions. Extracellular tumour pH values were measured in vivo by MRI-CEST pH mapping of TS/A tumour-bearing mice before, three days and fifteen days after DCA or saline treatment. Reduced extracellular acidification and vitality were observed in DCA-treated TS/A cells. Tumour-bearing mice showed a marked and significant increase of tumour extracellular pH at 3 days post-DCA treatment, reflecting DCA-induced glycolysis inhibition, as confirmed by reduced lactate production. After 15 days of DCA treatment, the onset of resistance to DCA was observed, with recover of tumour extracellular acidification and lactate levels that returned to baseline values. A significant correlation was observed between tumour extracellular pH values and lactate levels (r=-0.97, P<0.05). These results suggest that MRI-CEST pH imaging is a promising tool to monitor the early response and efficacy of cancer metabolic targeting drugs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据