An in vitro study of the effect of 5-ALA-mediated photodynamic therapy on oral squamous cell carcinoma

Abstract

Background The primary aim of this study was to observe the effect of 5-ALA-mediated photodynamic therapy on oral squamous cell carcinoma in vitro. Methods SCC25 cells were divided into the observation group and the blank control group. Different concentrations of 5-ALA and SCC25 cells were co-incubated for different times, and the concentration of protoporphyrin IX was detected by flow cytometry. SCC25 cells were divided into the 5-ALA group (100 mg/L), the laser irradiation group alone, the 5-ALA plus laser irradiation group, and the blank control group (0 mg/L 5-ALA), and the methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium (MTT) solution method was used (each group was incubated for 4, 8 and 12 h in turn). The cell survival rate was calculated. Using annexin V-fluorescein isothiocyanate/propidium iodide method, the apoptosis of SCC25 cells was detected by flow cytometry. Results The level of protoporphyrin IX in SCC25 cells increased with increased concentrations of 5-ALA and length of incubation. However, after 12 h, protoporphyrin IX level in SCC25 cells was gradually stabilized, and similar effect was obtained with 100 mg/L or more 5-ALA, indicating that the level of protoporphyrin IX in SCC25 cells was determined by 5-ALA concentration and incubation time. 5-ALA plus laser irradiation exerted an inhibitory effect on the growth of SCC25 cells, which was highly associated with drug dose and incubation time. Compared with the control group, laser irradiation alone or 5-ALA alone had no effect on the apoptosis of SCC25 cells. Different concentrations of 5-ALA combined with laser irradiation showed a remarkable effect of apoptosis, and a higher apoptosis rate was seen with higher drug concentrations. Conclusion 5-ALA-mediated photodynamic therapy affects the growth of SCC25 cells in vitro, which may provide a new idea for the clinical treatment of oral squamous cell carcinoma.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Anti-Human Cancer Experiments Investigating the Use of 5-Aminolevulinic Acid (5-ALA) for Photodynamic Therapy

“…Moreover, the parameters we mention in Table 1 (cell name, duration of incubation, irradiation wavelength, fluence, and duration between irradiation and viability assays) should be clearly mentioned in Section 2 because all of these parameters possibly affect the sensitivity of cells to 5-ALA PDT and the results of cell viability assays. Comparisons of the duration of 5-ALA incubation [ 35 , 68 , 103 ], irradiation wavelength [ 104 , 105 ], and fluence [ 30 , 31 ] showed that each parameter strongly affected cell viability. In addition, the duration between irradiation and viability assays can also affect the results because cell proliferation after light irradiation can be influenced by the number of viable cells with a sigmoid shape.…”

In Vitro Anti-tumor Effects of Photodynamic Therapy on Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Review

“…The following data were extracted and tabulated: cell line, PS and its concentration type of light source, wavelength, energy density (J/cm 2 ), type of evaluation, and main outcomes (Table S1, Supplementary file 1). 9,23,…”

“…While selectively destroying malignant cells and tissues, it is not affected by drug resistance and does not have the systemic side effects of other routine treatment methods like chemotherapy. 9,10 Cancer tissue destruction by PDT can be a result of direct cytotoxicity, vascular injury or a local inflammatory response that subsequently leads to a systemic anti-tumor immunological effect. [11][12][13] The concept of PDT was initially introduced by Oscar Raab in 1898, who found that paramecia incubated with a fluorescent dye were killed after being exposed to light.…”

The Comparison of In Vitro Photosensitizing Efficacy of Curcumin-Loaded Liposomes Following Photodynamic Therapy on Melanoma MUG-Mel2, Squamous Cell Carcinoma SCC-25, and Normal Keratinocyte HaCaT Cells

“…However, despite the effectiveness of the former, it cannot be applied in all cases due to adverse malignancy’s localization and potential patient’s co-morbidities [ 2 ]. Moreover, radiotherapy and chemotherapy can not only be toxic and lead to side effects but also might be ineffective in cells with developed resistance [ 4 ], whereas immunotherapy currently seems too complex for general use [ 5 ]. Therefore, further development of more efficient therapeutic strategies is still required.…”

“…Nonetheless, presently, PDT is not applicable in the treatment of metastatic cells [ 10 ]. The most common PS evoke a low therapeutic effect against highly pigmented melanoma cells [ 5 ], and the method itself can be burdened with pain, especially in combination with commonly used 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) [ 4 ]. For all those reasons, PDT enhancement is currently extensively investigated, especially with novel, high-efficient, and less toxic photosensitizers.…”