Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

In vivo study of enhanced chemotherapy combined with ultrasound image-guided focused ultrasound (USgFUS) treatment for pancreatic cancer in a xenograft mouse model

  • Oncology
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

This study was designed to investigate whether focused ultrasound (FUS) treatment with a higher mechanical index (MI) can enhance the effects of combined chemotherapy more than with a lower MI, and to evaluate the feasibility of the chemotherapy combined with FUS at a higher MI as an alternative treatment protocol.

Methods

Mice in the first study were divided into six groups: control, chemotherapy only (GEM), two groups treated with FUS only at two different MIs, and two groups treated with chemotherapy and FUS (GEM + FUS). Mice were treated with a single-session treatment; one session consisted of three weekly treatments and 1 week of follow-up monitoring. In the second study, mice were assigned to two groups (GEM, GEM + FUS) and treated with four treatment sessions.

Results

In the single-session treatment, tumor growth was most effectively suppressed in GEM + FUS group with a higher MI. Tumor growth rate was significantly lower in GEM + FUS group than in GEM group for multiple-session treatment. Specifically, three of ten mice in GEM + FUS group showed complete remission.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that FUS at a higher MI can enhance chemotherapy outcomes more than at a lower MI and demonstrated the potential of FUS in combination with chemotherapy as a new cancer treatment protocol.

Key points

• Combined treatment of chemotherapy and focused ultrasound can effectively suppress tumor growth.

• For the focused ultrasound treatment conditions used in this study, focused ultrasound with relatively higher mechanical index shows more enhanced therapeutic outcomes than with the lower mechanical index.

• Combination therapy shows the possibility as a new cancer treatment protocol.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

BBB:

blood–brain barrier

CR:

complete response

FUS:

focused ultrasound

GEM:

gemcitabine

H&E:

haematoxylin and eosin

IP:

intraperitoneal

MI:

mechanical index

USgFUS:

ultrasound image-guided focused ultrasound

References

  1. American Cancer Society (2011) Global cancer facts & figures, 2nd edn. American Cancer Society, Atlanta. https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/global-cancer-facts-and-figures/global-cancer-facts-and-figures-2nd-edition.pdf. Accessed 12 Jun 2017

  2. Ferlay J SI, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F (2013) GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, cancer incidence and mortality worldwide. IARC CancerBase

  3. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program of the National Cancer Institute. SEER cancer facts: pancreas cancer. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/pancreas.html. Accessed 22 Nov 2017

  4. Kamisawa T, Wood LD, Itoi T, Takaori K (2016) Pancreatic cancer. Lancet 388:73–85

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Amrutkar M, Gladhaug IP (2017) Pancreatic cancer chemoresistance to gemcitabine. Cancers 9:–157

  6. de Senneville BD, Moonen C, Ries M (2016) MRI-guided HIFU methods for the ablation of liver and renal cancers. Adv Exp Med Biol 880:43–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Peek MC, Ahmed M, Scudder J, Baker R, Pinder SE, Douek M (2016) High intensity focused ultrasound in the treatment of breast fibroadenomata: results of the HIFU-F trial. Int J Hyperthermia 32:881–888

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Quinn SD, Gedroyc WM (2015) Thermal ablative treatment of uterine fibroids. Int J Hyperthermia 31:272–279

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhao WP, Han ZY, Zhang J, Yu XL, Cheng ZG, Zhou X et al (2016) Early experience: high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for intra-abdominal aggressive fibromatosis of failure in surgery. Br J Radiol 89:20151026

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Hersh DS, Kim AJ, Winkles JA, Eisenberg HM, Woodworth GF, Frenkel V (2016) Emerging applications of therapeutic ultrasound in neuro-oncology: moving beyond tumor ablation. Neurosurgery 79:643–654

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Lin Q, Mao KL, Tian FR, Yang JJ, Chen PP, Xu J et al (2016) Brain tumor-targeted delivery and therapy by focused ultrasound introduced doxorubicin-loaded cationic liposomes. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 77:269–280

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Park EJ, Zhang YZ, Vykhodtseva N, McDannold N (2012) Ultrasound-mediated blood-brain/blood-tumor barrier disruption improves outcomes with trastuzumab in a breast cancer brain metastasis model. J Control Release 163:277-284

  13. Dalecki D (2004) Mechanical bioeffects of ultrasound. Ann Rev Biomed Eng 6:229-248

  14. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (2000) Section 6–mechanical bioeffects in the presence of gas-carrier ultrasound contrast agents. J Ultrasound Med 19:54–68

    Google Scholar 

  15. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (2000) Section 5–nonthermal bioeffects in the absence of well-defined gas bodies. J Ultrasound Med 19, 54-68

  16. Miller DL, Smith NB, Bailey MR, Czarnota GJ, Hynynen K, Makin IR (2012) Overview of therapeutic ultrasound applications and safety considerations. J Ultrasound Med 31:623–634

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. O'Brien WD Jr (2007) Ultrasound-biophysics mechanisms. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 93:212–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Humphrey VF (2007) Ultrasound and matter–physical interactions. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 93:195–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hoogenboom M, Eikelenboom D, den Brok MH, Heerschap A, Futterer JJ, Adema GJ (2015) Mechanical high-intensity focused ultrasound destruction of soft tissue: working mechanisms and physiologic effects. Ultrasound Med Biol 41:1500–1517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Khokhlova VA, Fowlkes JB, Roberts WW, Schade GR, Xu Z, Khokhlova TD et al (2015) Histotripsy methods in mechanical disintegration of tissue: towards clinical applications. Int J Hyperthermia 31:145–162

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Cao Y, Gao M, Chen C, Fan A, Zhang J, Kong D et al (2015) Triggered-release polymeric conjugate micelles for on-demand intracellular drug delivery. Nanotechnology 26:115101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Karavelidis V, Bikiaris D, Avgoustakis K (2015) New thermosensitive nanoparticles prepared by biocompatible pegylated aliphatic polyester block copolymers for local cancer treatment. J Pharm Pharmacol 67:215–230

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ta T, Bartolak-Suki E, Park EJ, Karrobi K, McDannold NJ, Porter TM (2014) Localized delivery of doxorubicin in vivo from polymer-modified thermosensitive liposomes with MR-guided focused ultrasound-mediated heating. J Control Release 194:71-81

  24. Wang A, Gao H, Sun Y, Sun YL, Yang YW, Wu G et al (2013) Temperature- and pH-responsive nanoparticles of biocompatible polyurethanes for doxorubicin delivery. Int J Pharm 441:30–39

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Yu D, Li W, Zhang Y, Zhang B (2016) Anti-tumor efficiency of paclitaxel and DNA when co-delivered by pH responsive ligand modified nanocarriers for breast cancer treatment. Biomed Pharmacother 83:1428–1435

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sanson C, Diou O, Thevenot J, Ibarboure E, Soum A, Brulet A et al (2011) Doxorubicin loaded magnetic polymersomes: theranostic nanocarriers for MR imaging and magneto-chemotherapy. ACS Nano 5:1122–1140

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Helfield B, Chen X, Watkins SC, Villanueva FS (2016) Biophysical insight into mechanisms of sonoporation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113:9983–9988

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Shi D, Guo L, Duan S, Shang M, Meng D, Cheng L et al (2016) Influence of tumor cell lines derived from different tissue on sonoporation efficiency under ultrasound microbubble treatment. Ultrason Sonochem. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.08.022

  29. ter Haar G (2007) Therapeutic applications of ultrasound. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 93:111–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kotopoulis Kotopoulis S, Delalande A, Popa M, Mamaeva V, Dimcevski G, Gilja OH et al (2014) Sonoporation-enhanced chemotherapy significantly reduces primary tumor burden in an orthotopic pancreatic cancer xenograft. Mol Imaging Biol 16:53–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Yu MH, Lee JY, Kim HR, Kim BR, Park EJ, Kim HS et al (2016) Therapeutic effects of microbubbles added to combined high-intensity focused ultrasound and chemotherapy in a pancreatic cancer xenograft model. Korean J Radiol 17:779–788

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Kotopoulis S, Stigen E, Popa M, Safont MM, Healey A, Kvale S et al (2017) Sonoporation with Acoustic Cluster Therapy (ACT®) induces transient tumor volume reduction in a subcutaneous xenograft model of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. J Control Release 245:70–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Lee ES, Lee JY, Kim H, Choi Y, Park J, Han JK et al (2013) Pulsed high-intensity focused ultrasound enhances apoptosis of pancreatic cancer xenograft with gemcitabine. Ultrasound Med Biol 39:1991–2000

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. ab Ithel Davies I, Gavrilov LR, Tsirulnikov EM (1996) Application of focused ultrasound for research on pain. Pain 67:17–27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Yudina A, Moonen C (2012) Ultrasound-induced cell permeabilisation and hyperthermia: strategies for local delivery of compounds with intracellular mode of action. Int J Hyperthermia 28:311–319

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Park J, Zhang Y, Vykhodtseva N, Akula JD, McDannold NJ (2012) Targeted and reversible blood-retinal barrier disruption via focused ultrasound and microbubbles. PloS one 7:e42754

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Aryal M, Park J, Vykhodtseva N, Zhang YZ, McDannold N (2015) Enhancement in blood-tumor barrier permeability and delivery of liposomal doxorubicin using focused ultrasound and microbubbles: evaluation during tumor progression in a rat glioma model. Phys Med Biol 60:2511–2527

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Okunaga S, Takasu A, Meshii N, Imai T, Hamada M, Iwai S et al (2015) Ultrasound as a method to enhance antitumor ability of oncolytic herpes simplex virus for head and neck cancer. Cancer Gene Ther 22:163–168

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Qin J, Wang TY, Willmann JK (2016) Sonoporation: applications for cancer therapy. Adv Exp Med Biol 880:263–291

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Jin Z, Choi Y, Ko SY, Park JO, Park S (2017) Experimental and simulation studies on focused ultrasound triggered drug delivery. Biotechnol Appl Biochem 64:134–142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Park EJ, Werner J, Smith NB (2007) Ultrasound mediated transdermal insulin delivery in pigs using a lightweight transducer. Pharm Res 24:1396–1401

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Chae SY, Kim YS, Park MJ, Yang J, Park H, Namgung MS et al (2014) High-intensity focused ultrasound-induced, localized mild hyperthermia to enhance anti-cancer efficacy of systemic doxorubicin: an experimental study. Ultrasound Med Biol 40:1554–1563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ventre DM, Koppes AN (2016) The body acoustic: ultrasonic neuromodulation for translational medicine. Cells Tissues Organs 202:23–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Cohen-Inbar O, Xu Z, Sheehan JP (2016) Focused ultrasound-aided immunomodulation in glioblastoma multiforme: a therapeutic concept. J Ther Ultrasound 4:2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Focused Ultrasound Foundation. Disease and conditions. https://www.fusfoundation.org/diseases-and-conditions-all/overview. Accessed 12 Jun 2017

  46. Coussios CC, Farny CH, Haar GT, Roy RA (2007) Role of acoustic cavitation in the delivery and monitoring of cancer treatment by high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). Int J Hyperthermia 23:105–120

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Kopechek JA, Park EJ, Zhang YZ, Vykhodtseva NI, Mcdannold NJ, Porter TM (2014) Cavitation-enhanced MR-guided focused ultrasound ablation of rabbit tumors in vivo using phase shift nanoemulsions. Phys Med Biol 59:3465–3481

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Lammertink BH, Bos C, van der Wurff-Jacobs KM, Storm G, Moonen CT, Deckers R (2016) Increase of intracellular cisplatin levels and radiosensitization by ultrasound in combination with microbubbles. J Control Release 238:157–165

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Tachibana K, Endo H, Feril LB, Nejad SM, Takahashi H, Narihira K et al (2015) Enhanced mechanical damage to in vitro cancer cells by high-intensity-focused ultrasound in the presence of microbubbles and titanium dioxide. J Med Ultrason (2001) 42:449–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Liu HL, Fan CH, Ting CY, Yeh CK (2014) Combining microbubbles and ultrasound for drug delivery to brain tumors: current progress and overview. Theranostics 4:432–444

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study has received funding by the National Research Foundation of Korea, which is funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (2012R1A1A1010930).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea

    Eun-Joo Park & Jae Young Lee

  2. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Korea, Seoul, Korea

    Eun-Joo Park & Yun Deok Ahn

  3. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea

    Jae Young Lee

Authors
  1. Eun-Joo Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yun Deok Ahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jae Young Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jae Young Lee.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Jae Young Lee.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Basic statistical methods were used by the authors who are well trained in clinical statistics.

Informed consent

This study was performed on animal models.

Ethical approval

Approval from the institutional animal care committee of Seoul National University Hospital was obtained.

Methodology

• prospective

• experimental

• performed at one institution.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Park, EJ., Ahn, Y.D. & Lee, J.Y. In vivo study of enhanced chemotherapy combined with ultrasound image-guided focused ultrasound (USgFUS) treatment for pancreatic cancer in a xenograft mouse model. Eur Radiol 28, 3710–3718 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5355-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5355-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation