Attritional evaluation of lipophilic and hydrophilic metallated phthalocyanines for oncological photodynamic therapy

Oncological photodynamic therapy (PDT) relies on photosensitizers (PSs) to photo-oxidatively destroy tumor cells. Currently approved PSs yield satisfactory results in superficial and easy-to-access tumors but are less suited for solid cancers in internal organs such as the biliary system and the pan...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology Biology, 2021-03, Vol.216, p.112146, Article 112146
Hauptverfasser: Dias, Lionel Mendes, Sharifi, Farangis, de Keijzer, Mark J., Mesquita, Barbara, Desclos, Emilie, Kochan, Jakub A., de Klerk, Daniel J., Ernst, Daniël, de Haan, Lianne R., Franchi, Leonardo P., van Wijk, Albert C., Scutigliani, Enzo M., Cavaco, José E.B., Tedesco, Antonio C., Huang, Xuan, Pan, Weiwei, Ding, Baoyue, Krawczyk, Przemek M., Heger, Michal
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 112146
container_title Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology
container_volume 216
creator Dias, Lionel Mendes
Sharifi, Farangis
de Keijzer, Mark J.
Mesquita, Barbara
Desclos, Emilie
Kochan, Jakub A.
de Klerk, Daniel J.
Ernst, Daniël
de Haan, Lianne R.
Franchi, Leonardo P.
van Wijk, Albert C.
Scutigliani, Enzo M.
Cavaco, José E.B.
Tedesco, Antonio C.
Huang, Xuan
Pan, Weiwei
Ding, Baoyue
Krawczyk, Przemek M.
Heger, Michal
description Oncological photodynamic therapy (PDT) relies on photosensitizers (PSs) to photo-oxidatively destroy tumor cells. Currently approved PSs yield satisfactory results in superficial and easy-to-access tumors but are less suited for solid cancers in internal organs such as the biliary system and the pancreas. For these malignancies, second-generation PSs such as metallated phthalocyanines are more appropriate. Presently it is not known which of the commonly employed metallated phtahlocyanines, namely aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPC) and zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPC) as well as their tetrasulfonated derivatives AlPCS4 and ZnPCS4, is most cytotoxic to tumor cells. This study therefore employed an attritional approach to ascertain the best metallated phthalocyanine for oncological PDT in a head-to-head comparative analysis and standardized experimental design. ZnPC and AlPC were encapsulated in PEGylated liposomes. Analyses were performed in cultured A431 cells as a template for tumor cells with a dysfunctional P53 tumor suppressor gene and EGFR overexpression. First, dark toxicity was assessed as a function of PS concentration using the WST-1 and sulforhodamine B assay. Second, time-dependent uptake and intracellular distribution were determined by flow cytometry and confocal microscopy, respectively, using the intrinsic fluorescence of the PSs. Third, the LC50 values were established for each PS at 671 nm and a radiant exposure of 15 J/cm2 following 1-h PS exposure. Finally, the mode of cell death as a function of post-PDT time and cell cycle arrest at 24 h after PDT were analyzed. In the absence of illumination, AlPC and ZnPC were not toxic to cells up to a 1.5-μM PS concentration and exposure for up to 72 h. Dark toxicity was noted for AlPCS4 at 5 μM and ZnPCS4 at 2.5 μM. Uptake of all PSs was observed as early as 1 min after PS addition to cells and increased in amplitude during a 2-h incubation period. After 60 min, the entire non-nuclear space of the cell was photosensitized, with PS accumulation in multiple subcellular structures, especially in case of AlPC and AlPCS4. PDT of cells photosensitized with ZnPC, AlPC, and AlPCS4 yielded LC50 values of 0.13 μM, 0.04 μM, and 0.81 μM, respectively, 24 h post-PDT (based on sulforhodamine B assay). ZnPCS4 did not induce notable phototoxicity, which was echoed in the mode of cell death and cell cycle arrest data. At 4 h post-PDT, the mode of cell death comprised mainly apoptosis for ZnPC and AlPC, the extent of which wa
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2021.112146
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2508589200</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1011134421000245</els_id><sourcerecordid>2508589200</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-6d1dda095e3ede32a77bac8cd55047d6b2e202f07d3dc188fe269365bbb47a2a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQhi1ERUvLX0CWOGfxR-xkj6XiS6rEhZ6tiT1pHHnjYHsr5d_jZVs4MhfPSO874_chhHK244zrj_NuXqdY4uBj2Akm-I5zwVv9ilzxvpON0L14XXvGecNl216StznPrJbS3RtyKaVmXCh9RcptKckXHxcIFJ8gHOE00DjS4Ne4Tj54S2FxdNpcepkPWCAEKOjoOpUJQrQbLH7BTMeYaFxsDPHR27rzzz_dtsCh-sqECdbthlyMEDK-e36vycOXzz_vvjX3P75-v7u9b2yrRGm0484B2yuU6FAK6LoBbG-dUqztnB4E1uwj65x0lvf9iELvpVbDMLQdCJDX5MN575riryPmYuZ4TDVpNkKxXvV7wVhV9WeVTTHnhKNZkz9A2gxn5oTbzOYfbnPCbc64q_X984HjcED31_jCtwo-nQVYYz55TCZbj4tF5xPaYlz0_7_yG6OlmgI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2508589200</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Attritional evaluation of lipophilic and hydrophilic metallated phthalocyanines for oncological photodynamic therapy</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Dias, Lionel Mendes ; Sharifi, Farangis ; de Keijzer, Mark J. ; Mesquita, Barbara ; Desclos, Emilie ; Kochan, Jakub A. ; de Klerk, Daniel J. ; Ernst, Daniël ; de Haan, Lianne R. ; Franchi, Leonardo P. ; van Wijk, Albert C. ; Scutigliani, Enzo M. ; Cavaco, José E.B. ; Tedesco, Antonio C. ; Huang, Xuan ; Pan, Weiwei ; Ding, Baoyue ; Krawczyk, Przemek M. ; Heger, Michal</creator><creatorcontrib>Dias, Lionel Mendes ; Sharifi, Farangis ; de Keijzer, Mark J. ; Mesquita, Barbara ; Desclos, Emilie ; Kochan, Jakub A. ; de Klerk, Daniel J. ; Ernst, Daniël ; de Haan, Lianne R. ; Franchi, Leonardo P. ; van Wijk, Albert C. ; Scutigliani, Enzo M. ; Cavaco, José E.B. ; Tedesco, Antonio C. ; Huang, Xuan ; Pan, Weiwei ; Ding, Baoyue ; Krawczyk, Przemek M. ; Heger, Michal ; Photodynamic Therapy Study Group</creatorcontrib><description>Oncological photodynamic therapy (PDT) relies on photosensitizers (PSs) to photo-oxidatively destroy tumor cells. Currently approved PSs yield satisfactory results in superficial and easy-to-access tumors but are less suited for solid cancers in internal organs such as the biliary system and the pancreas. For these malignancies, second-generation PSs such as metallated phthalocyanines are more appropriate. Presently it is not known which of the commonly employed metallated phtahlocyanines, namely aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPC) and zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPC) as well as their tetrasulfonated derivatives AlPCS4 and ZnPCS4, is most cytotoxic to tumor cells. This study therefore employed an attritional approach to ascertain the best metallated phthalocyanine for oncological PDT in a head-to-head comparative analysis and standardized experimental design. ZnPC and AlPC were encapsulated in PEGylated liposomes. Analyses were performed in cultured A431 cells as a template for tumor cells with a dysfunctional P53 tumor suppressor gene and EGFR overexpression. First, dark toxicity was assessed as a function of PS concentration using the WST-1 and sulforhodamine B assay. Second, time-dependent uptake and intracellular distribution were determined by flow cytometry and confocal microscopy, respectively, using the intrinsic fluorescence of the PSs. Third, the LC50 values were established for each PS at 671 nm and a radiant exposure of 15 J/cm2 following 1-h PS exposure. Finally, the mode of cell death as a function of post-PDT time and cell cycle arrest at 24 h after PDT were analyzed. In the absence of illumination, AlPC and ZnPC were not toxic to cells up to a 1.5-μM PS concentration and exposure for up to 72 h. Dark toxicity was noted for AlPCS4 at 5 μM and ZnPCS4 at 2.5 μM. Uptake of all PSs was observed as early as 1 min after PS addition to cells and increased in amplitude during a 2-h incubation period. After 60 min, the entire non-nuclear space of the cell was photosensitized, with PS accumulation in multiple subcellular structures, especially in case of AlPC and AlPCS4. PDT of cells photosensitized with ZnPC, AlPC, and AlPCS4 yielded LC50 values of 0.13 μM, 0.04 μM, and 0.81 μM, respectively, 24 h post-PDT (based on sulforhodamine B assay). ZnPCS4 did not induce notable phototoxicity, which was echoed in the mode of cell death and cell cycle arrest data. At 4 h post-PDT, the mode of cell death comprised mainly apoptosis for ZnPC and AlPC, the extent of which was gradually exacerbated in AlPC-photosensitized cells during 8 h. ZnPC-treated cells seemed to recover at 8 h post-PDT compared to 4 h post-PDT, which had been observed before in another cell line. AlPCS4 induced considerable necrosis in addition to apoptosis, whereby most of the cell death had already manifested at 2 h after PDT. During the course of 8 h, necrotic cell death transitioned into mainly late apoptotic cell death. Cell death signaling coincided with a reduction in cells in the G0/G1 phase (ZnPC, AlPC, AlPCS4) and cell cycle arrest in the S-phase (ZnPC, AlPC, AlPCS4) and G2 phase (ZnPC and AlPC). Cell cycle arrest was most profound in cells that had been photosensitized with AlPC and subjected to PDT. Liposomal AlPC is the most potent PS for oncological PDT, whereas ZnPCS4 was photodynamically inert in A431 cells. AlPC did not induce dark toxicity at PS concentrations of up to 1.5 μM, i.e., &gt; 37 times the LC50 value, which is favorable in terms of clinical phototoxicity issues. AlPC photosensitized multiple intracellular loci, which was associated with extensive, irreversible cell death signaling that is expected to benefit treatment efficacy and possibly immunological long-term tumor control, granted that sufficient AlPC will reach the tumor in vivo. Given the differential pharmacokinetics, intracellular distribution, and cell death dynamics, liposomal AlPC may be combined with AlPCS4 in a PS cocktail to further improve PDT efficacy. [Display omitted] •Zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPC) and aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPC) are lipophilic photosensitizers.•ZnPC and AlPC tetrasulfonate (S4) are hydrophilic derivatives.•Which of these is most optimal to treat cancer cells by photodynamic therapy?.•A head-to-head comparative analysis was performed; liposomal AlPC performed best.•Liposomal AlPC can be combined with AlPCS4 for multi-locus photosensitization.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1011-1344</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2682</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2021.112146</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33601256</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Aluminum ; Aluminum phthalocyanine ; Apoptosis ; Biocompatibility ; Cell cycle ; Cell death ; Cell survival ; Comparative analysis ; Confocal microscopy ; Cytotoxicity ; Dark toxicity ; Design of experiments ; Design standards ; Epidermal growth factor receptors ; Experimental design ; Exposure ; Flow cytometry ; Fluorescence ; G1 phase ; G2 phase ; Immunology ; Intracellular ; Intracellular signalling ; Lipophilic ; Mortality ; Necrosis ; Organs ; p53 Protein ; Pancreas ; Pharmacokinetics ; Photodynamic therapy ; Photosensitizers, cell death ; Phototoxicity ; Signaling ; Sulforhodamine ; Time dependence ; Toxicity ; Tumor cells ; Tumor suppressor genes ; Tumors ; Zinc phthalocyanine</subject><ispartof>Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology, 2021-03, Vol.216, p.112146, Article 112146</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV Mar 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-6d1dda095e3ede32a77bac8cd55047d6b2e202f07d3dc188fe269365bbb47a2a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-6d1dda095e3ede32a77bac8cd55047d6b2e202f07d3dc188fe269365bbb47a2a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2021.112146$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33601256$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dias, Lionel Mendes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharifi, Farangis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Keijzer, Mark J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mesquita, Barbara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Desclos, Emilie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kochan, Jakub A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Klerk, Daniel J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ernst, Daniël</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Haan, Lianne R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franchi, Leonardo P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Wijk, Albert C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scutigliani, Enzo M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cavaco, José E.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tedesco, Antonio C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Xuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pan, Weiwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ding, Baoyue</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krawczyk, Przemek M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heger, Michal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Photodynamic Therapy Study Group</creatorcontrib><title>Attritional evaluation of lipophilic and hydrophilic metallated phthalocyanines for oncological photodynamic therapy</title><title>Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology</title><addtitle>J Photochem Photobiol B</addtitle><description>Oncological photodynamic therapy (PDT) relies on photosensitizers (PSs) to photo-oxidatively destroy tumor cells. Currently approved PSs yield satisfactory results in superficial and easy-to-access tumors but are less suited for solid cancers in internal organs such as the biliary system and the pancreas. For these malignancies, second-generation PSs such as metallated phthalocyanines are more appropriate. Presently it is not known which of the commonly employed metallated phtahlocyanines, namely aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPC) and zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPC) as well as their tetrasulfonated derivatives AlPCS4 and ZnPCS4, is most cytotoxic to tumor cells. This study therefore employed an attritional approach to ascertain the best metallated phthalocyanine for oncological PDT in a head-to-head comparative analysis and standardized experimental design. ZnPC and AlPC were encapsulated in PEGylated liposomes. Analyses were performed in cultured A431 cells as a template for tumor cells with a dysfunctional P53 tumor suppressor gene and EGFR overexpression. First, dark toxicity was assessed as a function of PS concentration using the WST-1 and sulforhodamine B assay. Second, time-dependent uptake and intracellular distribution were determined by flow cytometry and confocal microscopy, respectively, using the intrinsic fluorescence of the PSs. Third, the LC50 values were established for each PS at 671 nm and a radiant exposure of 15 J/cm2 following 1-h PS exposure. Finally, the mode of cell death as a function of post-PDT time and cell cycle arrest at 24 h after PDT were analyzed. In the absence of illumination, AlPC and ZnPC were not toxic to cells up to a 1.5-μM PS concentration and exposure for up to 72 h. Dark toxicity was noted for AlPCS4 at 5 μM and ZnPCS4 at 2.5 μM. Uptake of all PSs was observed as early as 1 min after PS addition to cells and increased in amplitude during a 2-h incubation period. After 60 min, the entire non-nuclear space of the cell was photosensitized, with PS accumulation in multiple subcellular structures, especially in case of AlPC and AlPCS4. PDT of cells photosensitized with ZnPC, AlPC, and AlPCS4 yielded LC50 values of 0.13 μM, 0.04 μM, and 0.81 μM, respectively, 24 h post-PDT (based on sulforhodamine B assay). ZnPCS4 did not induce notable phototoxicity, which was echoed in the mode of cell death and cell cycle arrest data. At 4 h post-PDT, the mode of cell death comprised mainly apoptosis for ZnPC and AlPC, the extent of which was gradually exacerbated in AlPC-photosensitized cells during 8 h. ZnPC-treated cells seemed to recover at 8 h post-PDT compared to 4 h post-PDT, which had been observed before in another cell line. AlPCS4 induced considerable necrosis in addition to apoptosis, whereby most of the cell death had already manifested at 2 h after PDT. During the course of 8 h, necrotic cell death transitioned into mainly late apoptotic cell death. Cell death signaling coincided with a reduction in cells in the G0/G1 phase (ZnPC, AlPC, AlPCS4) and cell cycle arrest in the S-phase (ZnPC, AlPC, AlPCS4) and G2 phase (ZnPC and AlPC). Cell cycle arrest was most profound in cells that had been photosensitized with AlPC and subjected to PDT. Liposomal AlPC is the most potent PS for oncological PDT, whereas ZnPCS4 was photodynamically inert in A431 cells. AlPC did not induce dark toxicity at PS concentrations of up to 1.5 μM, i.e., &gt; 37 times the LC50 value, which is favorable in terms of clinical phototoxicity issues. AlPC photosensitized multiple intracellular loci, which was associated with extensive, irreversible cell death signaling that is expected to benefit treatment efficacy and possibly immunological long-term tumor control, granted that sufficient AlPC will reach the tumor in vivo. Given the differential pharmacokinetics, intracellular distribution, and cell death dynamics, liposomal AlPC may be combined with AlPCS4 in a PS cocktail to further improve PDT efficacy. [Display omitted] •Zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPC) and aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPC) are lipophilic photosensitizers.•ZnPC and AlPC tetrasulfonate (S4) are hydrophilic derivatives.•Which of these is most optimal to treat cancer cells by photodynamic therapy?.•A head-to-head comparative analysis was performed; liposomal AlPC performed best.•Liposomal AlPC can be combined with AlPCS4 for multi-locus photosensitization.</description><subject>Aluminum</subject><subject>Aluminum phthalocyanine</subject><subject>Apoptosis</subject><subject>Biocompatibility</subject><subject>Cell cycle</subject><subject>Cell death</subject><subject>Cell survival</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Confocal microscopy</subject><subject>Cytotoxicity</subject><subject>Dark toxicity</subject><subject>Design of experiments</subject><subject>Design standards</subject><subject>Epidermal growth factor receptors</subject><subject>Experimental design</subject><subject>Exposure</subject><subject>Flow cytometry</subject><subject>Fluorescence</subject><subject>G1 phase</subject><subject>G2 phase</subject><subject>Immunology</subject><subject>Intracellular</subject><subject>Intracellular signalling</subject><subject>Lipophilic</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Necrosis</subject><subject>Organs</subject><subject>p53 Protein</subject><subject>Pancreas</subject><subject>Pharmacokinetics</subject><subject>Photodynamic therapy</subject><subject>Photosensitizers, cell death</subject><subject>Phototoxicity</subject><subject>Signaling</subject><subject>Sulforhodamine</subject><subject>Time dependence</subject><subject>Toxicity</subject><subject>Tumor cells</subject><subject>Tumor suppressor genes</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><subject>Zinc phthalocyanine</subject><issn>1011-1344</issn><issn>1873-2682</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQhi1ERUvLX0CWOGfxR-xkj6XiS6rEhZ6tiT1pHHnjYHsr5d_jZVs4MhfPSO874_chhHK244zrj_NuXqdY4uBj2Akm-I5zwVv9ilzxvpON0L14XXvGecNl216StznPrJbS3RtyKaVmXCh9RcptKckXHxcIFJ8gHOE00DjS4Ne4Tj54S2FxdNpcepkPWCAEKOjoOpUJQrQbLH7BTMeYaFxsDPHR27rzzz_dtsCh-sqECdbthlyMEDK-e36vycOXzz_vvjX3P75-v7u9b2yrRGm0484B2yuU6FAK6LoBbG-dUqztnB4E1uwj65x0lvf9iELvpVbDMLQdCJDX5MN575riryPmYuZ4TDVpNkKxXvV7wVhV9WeVTTHnhKNZkz9A2gxn5oTbzOYfbnPCbc64q_X984HjcED31_jCtwo-nQVYYz55TCZbj4tF5xPaYlz0_7_yG6OlmgI</recordid><startdate>202103</startdate><enddate>202103</enddate><creator>Dias, Lionel Mendes</creator><creator>Sharifi, Farangis</creator><creator>de Keijzer, Mark J.</creator><creator>Mesquita, Barbara</creator><creator>Desclos, Emilie</creator><creator>Kochan, Jakub A.</creator><creator>de Klerk, Daniel J.</creator><creator>Ernst, Daniël</creator><creator>de Haan, Lianne R.</creator><creator>Franchi, Leonardo P.</creator><creator>van Wijk, Albert C.</creator><creator>Scutigliani, Enzo M.</creator><creator>Cavaco, José E.B.</creator><creator>Tedesco, Antonio C.</creator><creator>Huang, Xuan</creator><creator>Pan, Weiwei</creator><creator>Ding, Baoyue</creator><creator>Krawczyk, Przemek M.</creator><creator>Heger, Michal</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202103</creationdate><title>Attritional evaluation of lipophilic and hydrophilic metallated phthalocyanines for oncological photodynamic therapy</title><author>Dias, Lionel Mendes ; Sharifi, Farangis ; de Keijzer, Mark J. ; Mesquita, Barbara ; Desclos, Emilie ; Kochan, Jakub A. ; de Klerk, Daniel J. ; Ernst, Daniël ; de Haan, Lianne R. ; Franchi, Leonardo P. ; van Wijk, Albert C. ; Scutigliani, Enzo M. ; Cavaco, José E.B. ; Tedesco, Antonio C. ; Huang, Xuan ; Pan, Weiwei ; Ding, Baoyue ; Krawczyk, Przemek M. ; Heger, Michal</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-6d1dda095e3ede32a77bac8cd55047d6b2e202f07d3dc188fe269365bbb47a2a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Aluminum</topic><topic>Aluminum phthalocyanine</topic><topic>Apoptosis</topic><topic>Biocompatibility</topic><topic>Cell cycle</topic><topic>Cell death</topic><topic>Cell survival</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Confocal microscopy</topic><topic>Cytotoxicity</topic><topic>Dark toxicity</topic><topic>Design of experiments</topic><topic>Design standards</topic><topic>Epidermal growth factor receptors</topic><topic>Experimental design</topic><topic>Exposure</topic><topic>Flow cytometry</topic><topic>Fluorescence</topic><topic>G1 phase</topic><topic>G2 phase</topic><topic>Immunology</topic><topic>Intracellular</topic><topic>Intracellular signalling</topic><topic>Lipophilic</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Necrosis</topic><topic>Organs</topic><topic>p53 Protein</topic><topic>Pancreas</topic><topic>Pharmacokinetics</topic><topic>Photodynamic therapy</topic><topic>Photosensitizers, cell death</topic><topic>Phototoxicity</topic><topic>Signaling</topic><topic>Sulforhodamine</topic><topic>Time dependence</topic><topic>Toxicity</topic><topic>Tumor cells</topic><topic>Tumor suppressor genes</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><topic>Zinc phthalocyanine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dias, Lionel Mendes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharifi, Farangis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Keijzer, Mark J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mesquita, Barbara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Desclos, Emilie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kochan, Jakub A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Klerk, Daniel J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ernst, Daniël</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Haan, Lianne R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franchi, Leonardo P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Wijk, Albert C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scutigliani, Enzo M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cavaco, José E.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tedesco, Antonio C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Xuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pan, Weiwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ding, Baoyue</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krawczyk, Przemek M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heger, Michal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Photodynamic Therapy Study Group</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dias, Lionel Mendes</au><au>Sharifi, Farangis</au><au>de Keijzer, Mark J.</au><au>Mesquita, Barbara</au><au>Desclos, Emilie</au><au>Kochan, Jakub A.</au><au>de Klerk, Daniel J.</au><au>Ernst, Daniël</au><au>de Haan, Lianne R.</au><au>Franchi, Leonardo P.</au><au>van Wijk, Albert C.</au><au>Scutigliani, Enzo M.</au><au>Cavaco, José E.B.</au><au>Tedesco, Antonio C.</au><au>Huang, Xuan</au><au>Pan, Weiwei</au><au>Ding, Baoyue</au><au>Krawczyk, Przemek M.</au><au>Heger, Michal</au><aucorp>Photodynamic Therapy Study Group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Attritional evaluation of lipophilic and hydrophilic metallated phthalocyanines for oncological photodynamic therapy</atitle><jtitle>Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology</jtitle><addtitle>J Photochem Photobiol B</addtitle><date>2021-03</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>216</volume><spage>112146</spage><pages>112146-</pages><artnum>112146</artnum><issn>1011-1344</issn><eissn>1873-2682</eissn><abstract>Oncological photodynamic therapy (PDT) relies on photosensitizers (PSs) to photo-oxidatively destroy tumor cells. Currently approved PSs yield satisfactory results in superficial and easy-to-access tumors but are less suited for solid cancers in internal organs such as the biliary system and the pancreas. For these malignancies, second-generation PSs such as metallated phthalocyanines are more appropriate. Presently it is not known which of the commonly employed metallated phtahlocyanines, namely aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPC) and zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPC) as well as their tetrasulfonated derivatives AlPCS4 and ZnPCS4, is most cytotoxic to tumor cells. This study therefore employed an attritional approach to ascertain the best metallated phthalocyanine for oncological PDT in a head-to-head comparative analysis and standardized experimental design. ZnPC and AlPC were encapsulated in PEGylated liposomes. Analyses were performed in cultured A431 cells as a template for tumor cells with a dysfunctional P53 tumor suppressor gene and EGFR overexpression. First, dark toxicity was assessed as a function of PS concentration using the WST-1 and sulforhodamine B assay. Second, time-dependent uptake and intracellular distribution were determined by flow cytometry and confocal microscopy, respectively, using the intrinsic fluorescence of the PSs. Third, the LC50 values were established for each PS at 671 nm and a radiant exposure of 15 J/cm2 following 1-h PS exposure. Finally, the mode of cell death as a function of post-PDT time and cell cycle arrest at 24 h after PDT were analyzed. In the absence of illumination, AlPC and ZnPC were not toxic to cells up to a 1.5-μM PS concentration and exposure for up to 72 h. Dark toxicity was noted for AlPCS4 at 5 μM and ZnPCS4 at 2.5 μM. Uptake of all PSs was observed as early as 1 min after PS addition to cells and increased in amplitude during a 2-h incubation period. After 60 min, the entire non-nuclear space of the cell was photosensitized, with PS accumulation in multiple subcellular structures, especially in case of AlPC and AlPCS4. PDT of cells photosensitized with ZnPC, AlPC, and AlPCS4 yielded LC50 values of 0.13 μM, 0.04 μM, and 0.81 μM, respectively, 24 h post-PDT (based on sulforhodamine B assay). ZnPCS4 did not induce notable phototoxicity, which was echoed in the mode of cell death and cell cycle arrest data. At 4 h post-PDT, the mode of cell death comprised mainly apoptosis for ZnPC and AlPC, the extent of which was gradually exacerbated in AlPC-photosensitized cells during 8 h. ZnPC-treated cells seemed to recover at 8 h post-PDT compared to 4 h post-PDT, which had been observed before in another cell line. AlPCS4 induced considerable necrosis in addition to apoptosis, whereby most of the cell death had already manifested at 2 h after PDT. During the course of 8 h, necrotic cell death transitioned into mainly late apoptotic cell death. Cell death signaling coincided with a reduction in cells in the G0/G1 phase (ZnPC, AlPC, AlPCS4) and cell cycle arrest in the S-phase (ZnPC, AlPC, AlPCS4) and G2 phase (ZnPC and AlPC). Cell cycle arrest was most profound in cells that had been photosensitized with AlPC and subjected to PDT. Liposomal AlPC is the most potent PS for oncological PDT, whereas ZnPCS4 was photodynamically inert in A431 cells. AlPC did not induce dark toxicity at PS concentrations of up to 1.5 μM, i.e., &gt; 37 times the LC50 value, which is favorable in terms of clinical phototoxicity issues. AlPC photosensitized multiple intracellular loci, which was associated with extensive, irreversible cell death signaling that is expected to benefit treatment efficacy and possibly immunological long-term tumor control, granted that sufficient AlPC will reach the tumor in vivo. Given the differential pharmacokinetics, intracellular distribution, and cell death dynamics, liposomal AlPC may be combined with AlPCS4 in a PS cocktail to further improve PDT efficacy. [Display omitted] •Zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPC) and aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPC) are lipophilic photosensitizers.•ZnPC and AlPC tetrasulfonate (S4) are hydrophilic derivatives.•Which of these is most optimal to treat cancer cells by photodynamic therapy?.•A head-to-head comparative analysis was performed; liposomal AlPC performed best.•Liposomal AlPC can be combined with AlPCS4 for multi-locus photosensitization.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>33601256</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2021.112146</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1011-1344
ispartof Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology, 2021-03, Vol.216, p.112146, Article 112146
issn 1011-1344
1873-2682
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2508589200
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Aluminum
Aluminum phthalocyanine
Apoptosis
Biocompatibility
Cell cycle
Cell death
Cell survival
Comparative analysis
Confocal microscopy
Cytotoxicity
Dark toxicity
Design of experiments
Design standards
Epidermal growth factor receptors
Experimental design
Exposure
Flow cytometry
Fluorescence
G1 phase
G2 phase
Immunology
Intracellular
Intracellular signalling
Lipophilic
Mortality
Necrosis
Organs
p53 Protein
Pancreas
Pharmacokinetics
Photodynamic therapy
Photosensitizers, cell death
Phototoxicity
Signaling
Sulforhodamine
Time dependence
Toxicity
Tumor cells
Tumor suppressor genes
Tumors
Zinc phthalocyanine
title Attritional evaluation of lipophilic and hydrophilic metallated phthalocyanines for oncological photodynamic therapy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T02%3A40%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Attritional%20evaluation%20of%20lipophilic%20and%20hydrophilic%20metallated%20phthalocyanines%20for%20oncological%20photodynamic%20therapy&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20photochemistry%20and%20photobiology.%20B,%20Biology&rft.au=Dias,%20Lionel%20Mendes&rft.aucorp=Photodynamic%20Therapy%20Study%20Group&rft.date=2021-03&rft.volume=216&rft.spage=112146&rft.pages=112146-&rft.artnum=112146&rft.issn=1011-1344&rft.eissn=1873-2682&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2021.112146&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2508589200%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2508589200&rft_id=info:pmid/33601256&rft_els_id=S1011134421000245&rfr_iscdi=true