Background: Irradiation with ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) has been shown to spare normal tissue without hampering tumor control in several in vivo studies. Few cell lines have been investigated in vitro, and previous results are inconsistent. Assuming that oxygen depletion accounts for the FLASH sparing effect, no sparing should appear for cells irradiated with low doses in normoxia.
Methods: Seven cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-231, MCF7, WiDr, LU-HNSCC4, HeLa [early passage and subclone]) and normal lung fibroblasts (MRC-5) were irradiated with doses ranging from 0 to 12 Gy using FLASH (≥800 Gy/s) or conventional dose rates (CONV, 14 Gy/min), with a 10 MeV electron beam from a clinical linear accelerator. Surviving fraction (SF) was determined with clonogenic assays. Three cell lines were further studied for radiation-induced DNA-damage foci using a 53BP1-marker and for cell cycle synchronization after irradiation.
Results: A tendency of increased survival following FLASH compared with CONV was suggested for all cell lines, with significant differences for 4/7 cell lines. The magnitude of the FLASH-sparing expressed as a dose-modifying factor at SF=0.1 was around 1.1 for 6/7 cell lines and around 1.3 for the HeLasubclone. Similar cell cycle distributions and 53BP1-foci numbers were found comparing FLASH to CONV.
Conclusion: We have found a FLASH effect appearing at low doses under normoxic conditions for several cell lines in vitro. The magnitude of the FLASH effect differed between the cell lines, suggesting inherited biological susceptibilities for FLASH irradiation.
Inhibition of the MDM2/X-p53 interaction is recognized as a potential anti-cancer strategy, including the treatment of glioblastoma (GB). In response to cellular stressors, such as DNA damage, the tumor suppression protein p53 is activated and responds by mediating cellular damage through DNA repair, cell cycle arrest and apoptosis. Hence, p53 activation plays a central role in cell survival and the effectiveness of cancer therapies. Alterations and reduced activity of p53 occur in 25-30% of primary GB tumors, but this number increases drastically to 60-70% in secondary GB. As a result, reactivating p53 is suggested as a treatment strategy, either by using targeted molecules to convert the mutant p53 back to its wild type form or by using MDM2 and MDMX (also known as MDM4) inhibitors. MDM2 down regulates p53 activity via ubiquitin-dependent degradation and is amplified or overexpressed in 14% of GB cases. Thus, suppression of MDM2 offers an opportunity for urgently needed new therapeutic interventions for GB. Numerous small molecule MDM2 inhibitors are currently undergoing clinical evaluation, either as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy and/or other targeted agents. In addition, considering the major role of both p53 and MDM2 in the downstream signaling response to radiation-induced DNA damage, the combination of MDM2 inhibitors with radiation may offer a valuable therapeutic radiosensitizing approach for GB therapy. This review covers the role of MDM2/X in cancer and more specifically in GB, followed by the rationale for the potential radiosensitizing effect of MDM2 inhibition. Finally, the current status of MDM2/X inhibition and p53 activation for the treatment of GB is given.
Although abscopal tumor regression remains a rare phenomenon, interest in exploiting how radiation stimulates the immune system to induce systemic abscopal response is increasing. Here, we tested the hypothesis that tumor immunogenicity determined the ability of radiotherapy to induce abscopal effects. We established highly (MC-38 and E.G7-OVA) or poorly (LL/2 and B16-F10) immunogenic tumor models in this study and treated them with sham radiation, a single dose of 15 Gy, or three fractions of 5 Gy on three consecutive days. Alterations in the tumor microenvironment after radiation were examined by flow cytometry and RNA sequencing. Our results demonstrated the positive correlation between tumor immunogenicity and the abscopal effect of radiotherapy. The single dose of 15 Gy radiation was an effective regimen for inducing abscopal effects in highly immunogenic tumors. Local radiation reshaped the tumor microenvironment of irradiated and non-irradiated distant tumors by increasing CD8 T-cell infiltration and reducing suppressive immune cell accumulation. However, radiation alone was insufficient to elicit abscopal effects in poorly immunogenic tumors. No significant alterations were detected in the non-irradiated distant tumor microenvironment after radiation of poorly immunogenic tumors. In addition, tumor immunogenic subtypes were associated with the radiological response and clinical outcome of patients receiving radiotherapy. These findings indicated that tumor immunogenicity was the dominant characteristic that could predict the abscopal effect of radiotherapy. Our study provides an in-depth understanding of the immunological mechanisms involved in abscopal effects and highlights the impact of tumor heterogeneity on the therapeutic efficacy of radiotherapy and their combination with immunotherapy in clinical trials.
FLASH radiotherapy has emerged as a treatment technique with great potential to increase the differential effect between normal tissue toxicity and tumor response compared to conventional radiotherapy. To evaluate the feasibility of FLASH radiotherapy in a relevant clinical setting, we have commenced a feasibility and safety study of FLASH radiotherapy in canine cancer patients with spontaneous superficial solid tumors or microscopic residual disease, using the electron beam of our modified clinical linear accelerator. The setup for FLASH radiotherapy was established using a short electron applicator with a nominal source-to-surface distance of 70 cm and custom-made Cerrobend blocks for collimation. The beam was characterized by measuring dose profiles and depth dose curves for various field sizes. Ten canine cancer patients were included in this initial study; seven patients with nine solid superficial tumors and three patients with microscopic disease. The administered dose ranged from 15 to 35 Gy. To ensure correct delivery of the prescribed dose, film measurements were performed prior to and during treatment, and a Farmer-type ion-chamber was used for monitoring. Treatments were found to be feasible, with partial response, complete response or stable disease recorded in 11/13 irradiated tumors. Adverse events observed at follow-up ranging from 3-6 months were mild and consisted of local alopecia, leukotricia, dry desquamation, mild erythema or swelling. One patient receiving a 35 Gy dose to the nasal planum, had a grade 3 skin adverse event. Dosimetric procedures, safety and an efficient clincal workflow for FLASH radiotherapy was established. The experience from this initial study will be used as a basis for a veterinary phase I/II clinical trial with more specific patient inclusion selection, and subsequently for human trials.
Five decades ago, Franz Halberg conceived the idea of a circadian-based therapy for cancer, given the differential tolerance to treatment derived from the intrinsic host rhythms. Nowadays, different experimental models have demonstrated that both the toxicity and efficacy of several anticancer drugs vary by more than 50% as a function of dosing time. Accordingly, it has been shown that chemotherapeutic regimens optimally timed with the circadian cycle have jointly improved patient outcomes both at the preclinical and clinical levels. Along with chemotherapy, radiation therapy is widely used for cancer treatment, but its effectiveness relies mainly on its ability to damage DNA. Notably, the DNA damage response including DNA repair, DNA damage checkpoints, and apoptosis is gated by the circadian clock. Thus, the therapeutic potential of circadian-based radiotherapy against cancer is mainly dependent upon the control that the molecular clock exerts on DNA repair enzymes across the cell cycle. Unfortunately, the time of treatment administration is not usually considered in clinical practice as it varies along the daytime working hours. Currently, only a few studies have evaluated whether the timing of radiotherapy affects the treatment outcome. Several of these studies show that it is possible to reduce the toxicity of the treatment if it is applied at a specific time range, although with some inconsistencies. In this Perspective, we review the main advances in the field of chronoradiotherapy, the possible causes of the inconsistencies observed in the studies so far and provide some recommendations for future trials.
Frontiers in Oncology
Predictive, Prognostic Biomarkers and Therapeutic Targets in Breast Cancer