Dose-response relationship in cisplatin-treated breast cancer xenografts monitored with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound
Tóm tắt
Exactly assessing tumor response to different dose of chemotherapy would help to tailor therapy for individual patients. This study was to determine the feasibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the evaluation of tumor vascular response to different dose cisplatin. MCF-7 breast cancer bearing mice were treated with different dose of cisplatin in group B (1 mg/kg) and group C (3 mg/kg). A control group A was given with saline. Sequential CEUS was performed on days 0, 3 and 7 of the treatment, in which time-signal intensity curves were obtained from the intratumoral and depth-matched liver parenchyma. Peak enhancement (PE), area under the curve of wash-in (WiAUC), wash-in rate (WiR) and wash-in perfusion index (WiPI) were calculated from perfusion time-intensity curves and normalized with respect to the adjacent liver parenchyma. Histopathological analysis was conducted to evaluate tumor cell density and microvascular density (MVD). Significant decreases in tumor normalized perfusion parameters were observed on day 3 in the high dose group and on day 7 in the low dose group. On day 7, nPE, nWiAUC, and nWiPI significantly decreased in group C and group B as compared with group A (P < 0.05), and further decreased in group C as compared with group B (P < 0.05). Significant decreases of tumor cell density and MVD were seen in treated group (group B and C) compared to control group (P < 0.05) and further decrease in group C compared to group B (P < 0.05). Dynamic CEUS for quantification of tumor perfusion could be used to evaluate tumor vascular response to different dose of chemotherapy.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Nitz UA, Mohrmann S, Fischer J, Lindemann W, Berdel WE, Jackisch C, et al. Comparison of rapidly cycled tandem high-dose chemotherapy plus peripheral-blood stem-cell support versus dose-dense conventional chemotherapy for adjuvant treatment of high-risk breast cancer: results of a multicentre phase III trial. Lancet. 2005;366:1935–44.
Lorch A, Bascoul-Mollevi C, Kramar A, Einhorn L, Necchi A, Massard C, et al. Conventional-dose versus high-dose chemotherapy as first salvage treatment in male patients with metastatic germ cell tumors: evidence from a large international database. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2178–84.
Leonard RC, Lind M, Twelves C, Coleman R, van Belle S, Wilson C, et al. Conventional adjuvant chemotherapy versus single-cycle, autograft-supported, high-dose, late-intensification chemotherapy in high-risk breast cancer patients: a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:1076–83.
Roche H, Viens P, Biron P, Lotz JP, Asselain B, PEGASE Group. High-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer: the French PEGASE experience. Cancer Control. 2003;10:42–7.
Cosgrove D, Lassau N. Imaging of perfusion using ultrasound. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37 Suppl 1:S65–85.
Lavisse S, Lejeune P, Rouffiac V, Elie N, Bribes E, Demers B, et al. Early quantitative evaluation of a tumor vasculature disruptive agent AVE8062 using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:100–11.
Zhou JH, Cao LH, Liu JB, Zheng W, Liu M, Luo RZ, et al. Quantitative assessment of tumor blood flow in mice after treatment with different doses of an antiangiogenic agent with contrast-enhanced destruction-replenishment US. Radiology. 2011;259:406–13.
Lassau N, Koscielny S, Chami L, Chebil M, Benatsou B, Roche A, et al. Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: early evaluation of response to bevacizumab therapy at dynamic contrast-enhanced US with quantification–preliminary results. Radiology. 2011;258:291–300.
O’Connor JP, Carano RA, Clamp AR, Ross J, Ho CC, Jackson A, et al. Quantifying antivascular effects of monoclonal antibodies to vascular endothelial growth factor: insights from imaging. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:6674–82.
Wang JW, Zheng W, Liu JB, Chen Y, Cao LH, Luo RZ, et al. Assessment of early tumor response to cytotoxic chemotherapy with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound in human breast cancer xenografts. PLoS One. 2013;8:e58274.
Wang JW, Zheng W, Chen Y, Cao LH, Luo RZ, Li AH, et al. Quantitative assessment of tumor blood flow changes in a murine breast cancer model after adriamycin chemotherapy using contrast-enhanced destruction-replenishment sonography. J Ultrasound Med. 2013;32:683–90.
Cao X, Xue J, Zhao B. Potential application value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in neoadjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2012;38:2065–71.
Schirin-Sokhan R, Winograd R, Roderburg C, Bubenzer J, NC d Ó, Guggenberger D, et al. Response evaluation of chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer by contrast enhanced ultrasound. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:541–5.
Phillips P, Gardner E. Contrast-agent detection and quantification. Eur Radiol. 2004;14 suppl 8:4–P10.
Greis C. Technology overview: SonoVue (Bracco, Milan). Eur Radiol. 2004;14 suppl 8:11–P15.
Correas JM, Burns PN, Lai X, Qi X. Infusion versus bolus of an ultrasound contrast agent: in vivo dose–response measurements of BR1. Invest Radiol. 2000;35:72–9.
Lampaskis M, Averkiou M. Investigation of the relationship of nonlinear backscattered ultrasound intensity with microbubble concentration at low MI. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2010;36:306–12.
Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR, Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis: correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1–8.
Tallman MS, Gray R, Robert NJ, LeMaistre CF, Osborne CK, Vaughan WP, et al. Conventional adjuvant chemotherapy with or without high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation in high-risk breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:17–26.
Cherry SM, Hunt PA, Hassold TJ. Cisplatin disrupts mammalian spermatogenesis, but does not affect recombination or chromosome segregation. Mutat Res. 2004;564:115–28.
Kolfschoten GM, Hulscher TM, Schrier SM, van Houten VM, Pinedo HM, Boven E. Time-dependent changes in factors involved in the apoptotic process in human ovarian cancer cells as a response to cisplatin. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;84:404–12.
Brepoels L, De Saint-Hubert M, Stroobants S, Verhoef G, Balzarini J, Mortelmans L, et al. Dose–response relationship in cyclophosphamide-treated B-cell lymphoma xenografts monitored with [18 F]FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:1688–95.
Jennings D, Hatton BN, Guo J, Galons JP, Trouard TP, Raghunand N, et al. Early response of prostate carcinoma xenografts to docetaxel chemotherapy monitored with diffusion MRI. Neoplasia. 2002;4:255–62.
Wang H, Zheng LF, Feng Y, Xie XQ, Yang XM, Zhang GX. CTA combined with CT perfusion for assessing the efficacy of anti-angiogenic therapy in rabbit VX2 tumors. Acad Radiol. 2012;19:358–65.
Choi NC, Fischman AJ, Niemierko A, Ryu JS, Ryu JS, Lynch T, et al. Dose–response relationship between probability of pathologic tumor control and glucose metabolic rate measured with FDG PET after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2002;54:1024–35.
Liu G, Rugo HS, Wilding G, McShane TM, Evelhoch JL, Ng C, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a pharmacodynamic measure of response after acute dosing of AG-013736, an oral angiogenesis inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors: results from a phase I study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5464–73.
Miller JC, Pien HH, Sahani D, Sorensen AG, Thrall JH. Imaging angiogenesis: applications and potential for drug development. J Natl Cancer lnst. 2005;97:172–87.
Miller KD, Sweeney CJ, Sledge GJ. Redefining the target: chemotherapeutics as antiangiogenics. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:1195–206.
Eberhard A, Kahlert S, Goede V, Hemmerlein B, Plate KH, Augustin HG. Heterogeneity of angiogenesis and blood vessel maturation in human tumors: implications for antiangiogenic tumor therapies. Cancer Res. 2000;60:1388–93.