skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-E-T-668: Radiosensitizing Effect of Bosutinib On Prostate and Colon Cancers: A Pilot in Vitro Study

Abstract

Purpose: Recently it has been reported that Bosutinib, a clinical kinase inhibitor, can enhance the tumor cell chemosensitivity by overriding DNA damage checkpoints. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no report on its effect on cell radiosensitivity in the literature. The objective of the present study is to determine whether Bosutinib has the potential to be used as a radiosensitizer for various cancer cell lines. Methods: In this study, we tested 4 cell lines derived from human prostate (LNCaP, PC-3, DU-145) and colon (HT-29) cancers. The cells were seeded into 12-well plates 24 hours prior to the radiation treatments. For each cell line, we designed 4 study groups, namely, the control, Bosutinib, radiotherapy, and radiotherapy+Bosutinib groups. We used 6 MV photon beams from a Siemens Artiste accelerator to deliver 2 Gy dose in one fraction to the cells in the radiotherapy and radiotherapy+Bosutinib groups. Immediately after irradiation, the cells in the radiotherapy+Bosutinib group were treated with Bosutinib (1µM) for 3 hours. The cell survival was evaluated through clonogenic assays. Results: The cell survival rates of the LNCaP, PC-3, DU-145, and HT-29 cells were found to be 21%, 92%, 76%, and 93% for the radiotherapy group; 21%, 69%,more » 67%, and 81% for the radiotherapy+Bosutinib group; and 103%, 107%, 86%, and 102% for the Bosutinib group, respectively. Although synergetic cell killing was not seen for the LNCaP and DU-145 cell lines in this study, the cell survival data from the clonogenic assay indicated that Bosutinib could enhance the sensitivity of PC-3 and HT-29 cells to radiation treatment. Conclusion: Our preliminary results demonstrated the possibility of Bosutinib as a radiosensitizer for certain prostate and colon cancers, which are resistant to radiotherapy. Further studies are warranted to quantify the radiosensitizing effect of Bosutinib.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1];  [1];  [2]
  1. Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA (United States)
  2. (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22538176
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; DNA DAMAGES; ENZYME INHIBITORS; GY RANGE 01-10; IN VITRO; LARGE INTESTINE; NEOPLASMS; PHOTON BEAMS; PROSTATE; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOSENSITIVITY; RADIOSENSITIZERS; RADIOTHERAPY; TUMOR CELLS

Citation Formats

Wang, B, Cvetkovic, D, Chen, L, Ma, C, Wang, C, and West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan. SU-E-T-668: Radiosensitizing Effect of Bosutinib On Prostate and Colon Cancers: A Pilot in Vitro Study. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4925031.
Wang, B, Cvetkovic, D, Chen, L, Ma, C, Wang, C, & West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan. SU-E-T-668: Radiosensitizing Effect of Bosutinib On Prostate and Colon Cancers: A Pilot in Vitro Study. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4925031.
Wang, B, Cvetkovic, D, Chen, L, Ma, C, Wang, C, and West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan. Mon . "SU-E-T-668: Radiosensitizing Effect of Bosutinib On Prostate and Colon Cancers: A Pilot in Vitro Study". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4925031.
@article{osti_22538176,
title = {SU-E-T-668: Radiosensitizing Effect of Bosutinib On Prostate and Colon Cancers: A Pilot in Vitro Study},
author = {Wang, B and Cvetkovic, D and Chen, L and Ma, C and Wang, C and West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Recently it has been reported that Bosutinib, a clinical kinase inhibitor, can enhance the tumor cell chemosensitivity by overriding DNA damage checkpoints. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no report on its effect on cell radiosensitivity in the literature. The objective of the present study is to determine whether Bosutinib has the potential to be used as a radiosensitizer for various cancer cell lines. Methods: In this study, we tested 4 cell lines derived from human prostate (LNCaP, PC-3, DU-145) and colon (HT-29) cancers. The cells were seeded into 12-well plates 24 hours prior to the radiation treatments. For each cell line, we designed 4 study groups, namely, the control, Bosutinib, radiotherapy, and radiotherapy+Bosutinib groups. We used 6 MV photon beams from a Siemens Artiste accelerator to deliver 2 Gy dose in one fraction to the cells in the radiotherapy and radiotherapy+Bosutinib groups. Immediately after irradiation, the cells in the radiotherapy+Bosutinib group were treated with Bosutinib (1µM) for 3 hours. The cell survival was evaluated through clonogenic assays. Results: The cell survival rates of the LNCaP, PC-3, DU-145, and HT-29 cells were found to be 21%, 92%, 76%, and 93% for the radiotherapy group; 21%, 69%, 67%, and 81% for the radiotherapy+Bosutinib group; and 103%, 107%, 86%, and 102% for the Bosutinib group, respectively. Although synergetic cell killing was not seen for the LNCaP and DU-145 cell lines in this study, the cell survival data from the clonogenic assay indicated that Bosutinib could enhance the sensitivity of PC-3 and HT-29 cells to radiation treatment. Conclusion: Our preliminary results demonstrated the possibility of Bosutinib as a radiosensitizer for certain prostate and colon cancers, which are resistant to radiotherapy. Further studies are warranted to quantify the radiosensitizing effect of Bosutinib.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4925031},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}
  • Purpose: To perform the comparison of dose distributions and dosevolume- histograms generated by VMAT and conventional field-in-field technique for left-sided breast and chestwall cancers; to determine whether VMAT offers more dosimetric benefits than does the field-in-field technique. Methods: All VMAT and field-in-filed plans were produced in Eclipse(version 10). Five plans were generated for left-sided breast and leftsided chestwall with supraclavicular nodes, respectively. A clockwise arc (CW) and a counter-clockwise arc (CCW) were used with start and stop angles being 310o±10o and 140o±10o. Collimator angles were 30o for CW and 330o for CCW. The conformity index (CI) is the ratio ofmore » V95% over PTV. The homogeneity index (HI) is the ratio of the difference between D2% and D98% over the prescribed dose. The V5, as an indicator of low dose bath to organs-at-risk, was used for ipsilateral lung, heart, contralateral lung, and contralateral breast. The V20, as an indicator of radiation pneumonitis, was used for ipsilateral lung. Results: Breast/chestwall VMAT delivers much higher low dose bath to ipsilateral lung, contralateral lung and contralateral breast/chestwall for both intact breast and chestwall with nodes. V5 for heart is increased in VMAT plans. V20 for ipsilateral lung is lower in VMAT plans. PTV coverage is similar for both techniques. For one particular chestwall patient with supraclavicular and internal mammary nodes, VMAT offers superior dose coverage of PTVs with slightly more low-dose-wash to heart, contralateral lung and contralateral breast. Conclusion: This study indicates that there is generally no benefit using VMAT for left-sided intact breast, due to large low-dose-bath (5Gy) to normal tissues with insignificant improvement in PTV coverage. Dosimetric benefits will be seen in VMAT plans for some chestwall patients with large size, and/or internal mammary nodes, etc. Whether a chestwall patient is treated with VMAT should be carefully analyzed on an individual basis.« less
  • Purpose: To evaluate the dosimetric effect of smooth drilling of proton compensators in proton prostate plans when compared to typical plunge drilling settings. Methods: Twelve prostate patients were planned in Eclipse treatment planning system using three different drill settings Smooth, Plunge drill A, and Plunge drill B. The differences between A and B were: spacing X[cm]: 0.4(A), 0.1(B), spacing Y[cm]: 0.35(A), 0.1(B), row offset [cm]: 0.2(A), 0(B). Planning parameters were kept consistent between the different plans, which utilized two opposed lateral beams arrangement. Mean differences absolute dosimetry in OAR constraints are presented. Results: The smooth drilled compensator based plans yieldedmore » equivalent target coverage to the plans generated with drill settings A and B. Overall, the smooth compensators reduced dose to the majority of organs at risk compared to settings A and B. Constraints were reduced for the following OAR: Rectal V75 by 2.12 and 2.48%, V70 by 2.45 and 2.91%, V65 by 2.85 and 3.37%, V50 by 2.3 and 5.1%, Bladder V65 by 4.49 and 3.67%, Penial Bulb mean by 3.7 and 4.2Gy, and the maximum plan dose 5.3 and 7.4Gy for option A vs smooth and option B vs smooth respectively. The femoral head constraint (V50<5%) was met by all plans, but it was not consistently lower for the smooth drilling plan. Conclusion: Smooth drilled compensators provide equivalent target coverage and overall slightly cooler plans to the majority of organs at risk; it also minimizes the potential dosimetric impacts caused by patient positioning uncertainty.« less
  • Purpose: Due to limited commissioning time, we previously only released our True beam non-FFF mode for prostate treatment. Clinical demand now pushes us to release the non-FFF mode for SRT/SBRT treatment. When re-planning on True beam previously treated SRT/SBRT cases on iX machine we found the patient specific QA pass rate was worse than iX’s, though the 2Gy/fx prostate Result had been as good. We hypothesize that in TPS the True beam DLG and MLC transmission values, of those measured during commissioning could not yet provide accurate SRS/SBRT dosimetry. Hence this work is to investigate how the TPS DLG andmore » transmission value affects Rapid Arc plans’ dosimetric accuracy. Methods: We increased DLG and transmission value of True beam in TPS such that their percentage differences against the measured matched those of iX’s. We re-calculated 2 SRT, 1 SBRT and 2 prostate plans, performed patient specific QA on these new plans and compared the results to the previous. Results: With DLG and transmission value set respectively 40 and 8% higher than the measured, the patient specific QA pass rate (at 3%/3mm) improved from 95.0 to 97.6% vs previous iX’s 97.8% in the case of SRT. In the case of SBRT, the pass rate improved from 75.2 to 93.9% vs previous iX’s 92.5%. In the case of prostate, the pass rate improved from 99.3 to 100%. The maximum dose difference in plans before and after adjusting DLG and transmission was approximately 1% of the prescription dose among all plans. Conclusion: The impact of adjusting DLG and transmission value on dosimetry might be the same among all Rapid Arc plans regardless hypofractionated or not. The large variation observed in patient specific QA pass rate might be due to the data analysis method in the QA software being more sensitive to hypofractionated plans.« less
  • Purpose: Re-irradiation with conventional radiotherapy techniques (CRT) may pose significant risks due to high accumulative radiation doses. Pulsed low dose-rate radiotherapy (PLDR) has been used in clinical trials for recurrent cancer treatment. In our previous studies, PLDR irradiation showed significantly lower toxicity than CRT, resulting in much longer survival of mice after PLDR total body irradiation (TBI) than conventional TBI. The purpose of this study was to investigate tumor control efficacy of PLDR treatment for prostate cancer with an animal model of prostate cancer LNCaP. Methods: We used an orthotopic murine model of LNCaP cell line for this study. LNCaPmore » cells were implanted into immune-suppressed male nude mice via surgery. We monitored the tumor growth with MRI. The tumor-bearing mice were allocated into a PLDR(n=9), CRT(n=7), and control group(n=7) randomly. The mice in the PLDR and CRT groups were irradiated with 2Gy dose for one time. For the CRT treatment, the mice received 2Gy at a dose-rate of 300 MU/minute. For the PLDR treatment, the 2Gy dose was further divided into ten pulses of 0.2Gy at the same dose-rate with an interval of 3 minutes between the pulses. Results: Sizable tumor growth delays were observed for the PLDR and CRT groups through weekly MRI scans. The mean values of the normalized tumor volumes (± standard deviation of the mean) were 1.53±0.07, 1.53±0.14, and 1.81±0.09 at one week after treatment, 2.28±0.13, 2.19±0.16, and 3.04±0.25 at two weeks after treatment, and 3.31±0.23, 3.14±0.24 and 4.62±0.49 at three weeks after treatment, for the PLDR, CRT, and control groups, respectively. Conclusion: The PLDR and CRT treatments showed comparable tumor control rates in this study. Our in vivo results indicate that PLDR may be a viable option for treating recurrent prostate cancer due to its equivalent tumor control but low normal tissue toxocities.« less
  • Purpose: To provide a proof of concept study for IMRT treatment planning through interactive dose shaping (IDS) by utilising the respective tools to create IMRT treatment plans for six prostate patients. Methods: The IDS planning paradigm aims to perform interactive local dose adaptations of an IMRT plan without compromising already established valuable dose features in real-time. Various IDS tools are available in our in-house treatment planning software Dynaplan and were utilised to create IMRT treatment plans for six patients with an adeno-carcinoma of the prostate. The sequenced IDS treatment plans were compared to conventionally optimised clinically approved plans (9 beams,more » co-planar). The starting point consisted of open fields. The IDS tools were utilised to sculpt dose out of the rectum and bladder. For each patient, several IDS plans were created, with different trade-offs between organ sparing and target coverage. The reference dose distributions were imported into Dynaplan. For each patient, the IDS treatment plan with a similar or better trade-off between target coverage and OAR sparing was selected for plan evaluation, guided by a physician. Pencil beam dose calculation was performed on a grid with a voxel size of 1.95×1.95×2.0 mm{sup 3}. D98%, D2%, mean dose and dose-volume indicators as specified by Quantec were calculated for plan evaluation. Results: It was possible to utilise the software prototype to generate treatment plans for prostate patient geometries in 15–45 minutes. Individual local dose adaptations could be performed in less than one second. The average differences compared to the reference plans were for the mean dose: 0.0 Gy (boost) and 1.2 Gy (CTV), for D98%: −1.1 Gy and for D2%: 1.1 Gy (both target volumes). The dose-volume quality indicators were well below the Quantec constraints. Conclusion: Real-time treatment planning utilising IDS is feasible and has the potential to be implemented clinically. Research at The Institute of Cancer Research is supported by Cancer Research UK under Programme C46/A10588.« less