[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Local treatment of mixed osteolytic/osteoblastic spinal metastases: is photodynamic therapy effective?

  • Preclinical Study
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The widespread use of systemic and local therapies aimed at spinal metastatic lesions secondary to breast cancer has increased the incidence of mixed osteolytic/osteoblastic patterns of bony disease. The complex structure of these lesions requires novel therapeutic approaches to both reduce tumor burden and restore structural stability. In photodynamic therapy (PDT), a minimally invasive approach can be used to employ light to activate a photosensitizing agent that preferentially accumulates in tumor tissue, leading to cell toxicity and death. Previous work in an osteolytic rat model (MT-1) demonstrated that PDT effectively ablates tumor and improves vertebral structural properties. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of PDT in a rat model of mixed osteolytic/osteoblastic spinal metastases. Mixed spinal metastases were generated through intracardiac injection of Ace-1 canine prostate cancer cells into female athymic rats (day 0). A single PDT treatment was applied to lumbar vertebra L2 of tumor-bearing and healthy control rats (day 14). PDT-treated and untreated control rats were euthanized and excised spines imaged with μCT to assess bone quality (day 21). Spines were mechanically tested or histologically processed to assess mechanical integrity, tumor burden, and remodelling properties. Untreated tumor-bearing vertebrae showed large areas of osteolysis and areas of immature, new bone formation. The overall bone quality resulting from these lesions consisted of decreased structural properties but without a significant reduction in mechanical integrity. PDT was shown to significantly decrease tumor burden and osteoclastic activity, thereby improving vertebral bone structural properties. While non-tumor-bearing vertebrae exhibited significantly more new bone formation following PDT, the already heightened level of new bone formation in the mixed tumor-bearing vertebrae was not further increased. As such, the effect of PDT on mixed metastases may be more influenced by suppression of osteoclastic resorption as opposed to the triggering of new bone formation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Roodman GD (2004) Mechanisms of bone metastasis. N Engl J Med 350(16):1655–1664

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Guise TA, Mohammad KS, Clines G, Stebbins EG, Wong DH, Higgins LS (2006) Basic mechanisms responsible for osteolytic and osteoblastic bone metastases. Clin Cancer Res 12:6213s–6216s

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Curtis C, Skrinskas T, Hardisty M, Clemons M, Whyne CM (2007) Changing disease patterns in breast cancer metastasis to the spine., vol 32. Orthopaedic Research Society, Transactions, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  4. Clezardin P, Teti A (2007) Bone metastasis: pathogenesis and therapeutic implications. Clin Exp Metastasis 24:599–608

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wong DA, Fornasier VL, MacNab I (1990) Spinal metastases: the obvious, the occult, and the impostors. Spine 15:1–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ross JR, Saunders Y, Edmonds PM, Patel S, Broadley KE, Johnston SRD (2003) Systematic review of role of bisphosphonates on skeletal morbidity in metastatic cancer. Br Med J 327:469

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ecker RD, Endo T, Wetjen NM, Krauss WE (2005) Diagnosis and treatment of vertebral column metastases. Mayo Clin Proc 80:1177–1186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Akens MK, Hardisty MR, Wilson BC, Schwock J, Whyne CM, Burch S et al (2010) Defining the therapeutic window of vertebral photodynamic therapy in a murine pre-clinical model of breast cancer metastasis using the photosensitizer BPD-MA (Verteporfin). Breast Cancer Res Treat 119:325–333

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Won E, Wise-Milestone L, Akens MK, Burch S, Yee AJM, Wilson BC et al (2010) Beyond bisphosphonates: photodynamic therapy structurally augments metastatically involved vertebrae and destroys tumour tissue. Breast Cancer Res Treat 124(1):111–119

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Burch S, Bogaards A, Siewerdsen J, Moseley D, Yee A, Finkelstein J, Weersink R, Wilson BC, Bisland SK (2005) Photodynamic therapy for the treatment of metastatic lesions in bone: studies in rat and porcine models. J Biomed Opt 10(3):034011

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Won E, Akens MK, Hardisty MR, Burch S, Bisland SK, Yee AJ, Wilson BC, Whyne CM (2010) Effects of photodynamic therapy on the structural integrity of vertebral bone. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(3):272–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. LeRoy BE, Thudi NK, Nadella MVP, Toribio RE, Tannehill-Gregg SH, van Bokhoven A et al (2006) New bone formation and osteolysis by a metastatic highly invasive canine prostate carcinoma xenograft. Prostate 66:1213–1222

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hardisty M, Gordon L, Agarwal P, Skrinskas T, Whyne C (2007) Quantitative characterization of metastatic disease in the spine. Part I. Semiautomated segmentation using atlas-based deformable registration and the level set method. Med Phys 34(8):3127–3134

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hojjat SP, Hardisty MR, Whync CM (2010) Micro-computed tomography-based highly automated 3D segmentation of the rat spine for quantitative analysis of metastatic disease. Spine 13(3):367–370

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Blomme EA, Dougherty KM, Pienta KJ, Capen CC, Rosol TJ, McCauley LK (1999) Skeletal metastasis of prostate adenocarcinoma in rats: morphometric analysis and role of parathyroid hormone-related protein. Prostate 39(3):187–197

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Thudi NK, Martin CK, Murahari S, Shu ST, Lanigan LG, Werbeck JL et al (2011) Dickkopf-1 (DKK-1) stimulated prostate cancer growth and metastasis and inhibited bone formation in osteoblastic bone metastases. Prostate 71(6):615–625

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Halvorson KG, Kubota K, Sevcik MA, Lindsay TH, Sotillo JE, Ghilardi JR et al (2005) A blocking antibody to nerve growth factor attenuates skeletal pain induced by prostate tumor cells growing in bone. Cancer Res 65(20):9426–9435

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Power CA, Pwint H, Chan J, Cho J, Yu Y, Walsh W et al (2009) A novel model of bone-metastatic prostate cancer in immunocompetent mice. Prostate 69:1613–1623

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bouxsein ML, Myers KS, Shultz KL, Donahue LR, Rosen CJ, Beamer WG (2005) Ovariectomy-induced bone loss varies among inbred strains of mice. J Bone Miner Res 20:1085–1092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Turner CH, Hsieh YF, Muller R, Bouxsein ML, Baylink DJ, Rosen CJ, Grynpas MD, Donahue LR, Beamer WG (2000) Genetic regulation of cortical and trabecular bone strength and microstructure in inbred strains of mice. J Bone Miner Res 15:1126–1131

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Thudi NK, Martin CK, Nadella MVP, Fernandez SA, Werbeck JL, Pinzone JJ et al (2008) Zoledronic acid decreased osteolysis but not bone metastasis in a nude mouse model of canine prostate cancer with mixed bone lesions. Prostate 68:1116–1125

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Dai J, Rabie AB (2007) VEGF: an essential mediator of both angiogenesis and endochondral ossification. J Dent Res 86:937–950

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gomer CJ, Ferrario A, Luna M, Rucker N, Wong S (2006) Photodynamic therapy: combined modality approaches targeting the tumour microenvironment. Lasers Surg Med 38:516–521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Street J, Bao M, deGuzman L, Bunting S, Peale FV Jr, Ferrara N, Steinmetz H, Hoeffel J, Cleland JL, Daugherty A, van Bruggen N, Redmond HP, Carano RA, Filvaroff EH (2002) Vascular endothelial growth factor stimulates bone repair by promoting angiogenesis and bone turnover. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:9656–9661

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Zelzer E, Olsen BR (2005) Multiple roles of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in skeletal development, growth, and repair. Curr Top Dev Biol 65:169–187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Nazarian A, von Stechow D, Zurakowski D, Muller R, Snyder BD (2008) Bone volume fraction explains the variation in strength and stiffness of cancellous bone affected by metastatic cancer and osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int 83:368–379

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Eswaran SK, Gupta A, Adams MF, Keaveny TM (2006) Cortical and trabecular load sharing in the human vertebral body. J Bone Miner Res 21:307–314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Zancanela DC, Primo FL, Rosa AL, Ciancaglini P, Tedesco AC (2011) The effect of photosensitizer drugs and light stimulation on osteoblast growth. Photomed Laser Surg 10:699–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bastian JD, Egli RJ, Ganz R, Hofstetter W, Leunig M (2009) Differential response of porcine osteoblasts and chondrocytes in cell or tissue culture after 5-aminolevulinic acid-based photodynamic therapy. Osteoarthr Cartil 17(40):539–546

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Egli RJ, Schober M, Hempfing A, Ganz R, Hofstetter W, Leunig M (2007) Sensitivity of osteoblasts, fibroblasts bone marrow cells, and dendritic cells to 5-aminolevulinic acid-based photodynamic therapy. J Photochem Photobiol B 89(2–3):70–77

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. TJ Rosol (Ohio State University) for kindly providing the Ace-1 canine prostate cancer cells. This study was supported by the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research and the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation, Ontario Chapter.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedic Biomechanics Laboratory, Sunnybrook Research Institute, UB-19, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada

    L. Wise-Milestone, M. K. Akens, V. C. K. Lo, A. J. Yee & C. M. Whyne

  2. Ontario Cancer Institute, University Health Network, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada

    B. C. Wilson

Authors
  1. L. Wise-Milestone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. K. Akens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. C. K. Lo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. J. Yee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. B. C. Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. M. Whyne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. M. Whyne.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wise-Milestone, L., Akens, M.K., Lo, V.C.K. et al. Local treatment of mixed osteolytic/osteoblastic spinal metastases: is photodynamic therapy effective?. Breast Cancer Res Treat 133, 899–908 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1854-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1854-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation