Microbubble therapy enhances anti-tumor properties of cisplatin and cetuximab in vitro and in vivo

Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (United States)

Volumn 146, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 938-945

  Heath, Cara H ^a   Sorace, Anna ^b   Knowles, Joseph ^a   Rosenthal, Eben ^a   Hoyt, Kenneth ^b,c  

^a University of Alabama at Birmingham   (United States)

^b 803 Shelby Interdisciplinary Biomedical Research Building   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

Author keywords

cetuximab; cisplatin; head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; microbubbles; ultrasound

Indexed keywords

CD31 ANTIGEN; CETUXIMAB; CISPLATIN;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; APOPTOSIS; ARTICLE; BLOOD VESSEL PERMEABILITY; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CELL COUNT; CELL MEMBRANE; CELL MEMBRANE PERMEABILITY; CELL SURVIVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOTOXICITY TEST; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; DRUG POTENTIATION; DRUG UPTAKE; FEMALE; HEAD AND NECK SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; HISTOPATHOLOGY; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; MEMBRANE DAMAGE; MICROBUBBLE MEDIATED ULTRASOUND THERAPY; MOUSE; NICK END LABELING; NONHUMAN; TUMOR CELL; TUMOR VOLUME; ULTRASOUND THERAPY;

ANIMALS; ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CELL CULTURE TECHNIQUES; CELL LINE, TUMOR; CELL SURVIVAL; CISPLATIN; FEMALE; HEAD AND NECK NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; MICE; MICE, NUDE; MICROBUBBLES; PERMEABILITY; ULTRASONIC THERAPY;

EID: 84864754646     PISSN: 01945998     EISSN: 10976817     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0194599812436648     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Ang KK, Trotti A, Brown BW, et al. Randomized trial addressing risk features and time factors of surgery plus radiotherapy in advanced head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 ; 51: 571-578
2. Seiwert TY, Cohen EE. State-of-the-art management of locally advanced head and neck cancer. Br J Cancer. 2005 ; 92: 1341-1348
3. Cancer Facts and Figures. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society ; 2010 2010 :
4. Cohen EE, Lingen MW, Vokes EE. The expanding role of systemic therapy in head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004 ; 22: 1743-1752
5. Forastiere AA, Goepfert H, Maor M, et al. Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for organ preservation in advanced laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003 ; 349: 2091-2098
6. Salomon DS, Brandt R, Ciardiello F, et al. Epidermal growth factor-related peptides and their receptors in human malignancies. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 1995 ; 19: 183-232
7. Herbst RS, Langer CJ. Epidermal growth factor receptors as a target for cancer treatment: the emerging role of IMC-C225 in the treatment of lung and head and neck cancers. Semin Oncol. 2002 ; 29: 27-36
8. Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J, et al. Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med. 2006 ; 354: 567-578
9. Logan RM. Advances in understanding of toxicities of treatment for head and neck cancer. Oral Oncol. 2009 ; 45: 844-848
10. Elting LS, Keefe DM, Sonis ST, et al. Patient-reported measurements of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients treated with radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy: demonstration of increased frequency, severity, resistance to palliation, and impact on quality of life. Cancer. 2008 ; 113: 2704-2713
11. Escoffre JM, Piron J, Novell A, et al. Doxorubicin delivery into tumor cells with ultrasound and microbubbles. Mol Pharm. 2011 ; 8: 799-806
12. Haag P, Frauscher F, Gradl J, et al. Microbubble-enhanced ultrasound to deliver an antisense oligodeoxynucleotide targeting the human androgen receptor into prostate tumours. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2006 ; 102: 103-113
13. Sorace AG, Warram J, Umphrey H, Hoyt K. Ultrasonic techniques for improved chemotherapeutic delivery in cancer. J Drug Target. 2012 ; 20: 43-54
14. Lin CJ, Grandis JR, Carey TE, et al. Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cell lines: established models and rationale for selection. Head Neck. 2007 ; 29: 163-188
15. KaruppiahM. Transient transfection and luciferase assay. Protocol Exchange. 2006. http://www.nature.com/protocolexchange/protocols/115.
16. Koh DM, Collins DJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. Am J Roentgenol. 2007 ; 188: 1622-1635
17. Karshafian R, Bevan PD, Williams R, et al. Sonoporation by ultrasound-activated microbubble contrast agents: effect of acoustic exposure parameters on cell membrane permeability and cell viability. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2009 ; 35: 847-860
18. Frenkel V. Ultrasound mediated delivery of drugs and genes to solid tumors. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2008 ; 60: 1193-1208
19. Deckers R, Yudina A, Cardoit LC, et al. A fluorescent chromophore TOTO-3 as a "smart probe" for the assessment of ultrasound-mediated local drug delivery in vivo. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2011 ; 6 (4). 267-274
20. Schlicher RK, Hutcheson JD, Radhakrishna H, et al. Changes in cell morphology due to plasma membrane wounding by acoustic cavitation. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2010 ; 36: 677-692
21. Aoi A, Watanabe Y, Mori S, et al. Herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase-mediated suicide gene therapy using nano/microbubbles and ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008 ; 34: 425-434
22. Gao Z, Kennedy AM, Christensen DA, et al. Drug-loaded nano/microbubbles for combining ultrasonography and targeted chemotherapy. Ultrasonics. 2008 ; 48: 260-270
23. Watanabe Y, Aoi A, Horie S, et al. Low-intensity ultrasound and microbubbles enhance the antitumor effect of cisplatin. Cancer Sci. 2008 ; 99: 2525-2531
24. Chou TC. Drug combination studies and their synergy quantification using the Chou-Talalay method. Cancer Res. 2010 ; 70: 440-446