Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

MDPI, Journal of Clinical Medicine, 1(9), p. 8, 2019

DOI: 10.3390/jcm9010008

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Lipophilicity of Bacteriochlorin-Based Photosensitizers as a Determinant for PDT Optimization through the Modulation of the Inflammatory Mediators

Journal article published in 2019 by Barbara Pucelik, Luis G. Arnaut ORCID, Janusz M. Dąbrowski ORCID
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) augments the host antitumor immune response, but the role of the PDT effect on the tumor microenvironment in dependence on the type of photosensitizer and/or therapeutic protocols has not been clearly elucidated. We employed three bacteriochlorins (F2BOH, F2BMet and Cl2BHep) of different polarity that absorb near-infrared light (NIR) and generated a large amount of reactive oxygen species (ROS) to compare the PDT efficacy after various drug-to-light intervals: 15 min. (V-PDT), 3h (E-PDT) and 72h (C-PDT). We also performed the analysis of the molecular mechanisms of PDT crucial for the generation of the long-lasting antitumor immune response. PDT-induced damage affected the integrity of the host tissue and developed acute (protocol-dependent) local inflammation, which in turn led to the infiltration of neutrophils and macrophages. In order to further confirm this hypothesis, a number of proteins in the plasma of PDT-treated mice were identified. Among a wide range of cytokines (IL-6, IL-10, IL-13, IL-15, TNF-α, GM-CSF), chemokines (KC, MCP-1, MIP1α, MIP1β, MIP2) and growth factors (VEGF) released after PDT, an important role was assigned to IL-6. PDT protocols optimized for studied bacteriochlorins led to a significant increase in the survival rate of BALB/c mice bearing CT26 tumors, but each photosensitizer (PS) was more or less potent, depending on the applied DLI (15 min, 3 h or 72 h). Hydrophilic (F2BOH) and amphiphilic (F2BMet) PSs were equally effective in V-PDT (>80 cure rate). F2BMet was the most efficient in E-PDT (DLI = 3h), leading to a cure of 65 % of the animals. Finally, the most powerful PS in the C-PDT (DLI = 72 h) regimen turned out to be the most hydrophobic compound (Cl2BHep), allowing 100 % of treated animals to be cured at a light dose of only 45 J/cm2.