Enhancing cold atmospheric plasma treatment of cancer cells by static magnetic field

Abstract

It has been reported since late 1970 that magnetic field interacts strongly with biological systems. Cold atmospheric plasma (CAP) has also been widely studied over the past few decades in physics, biology, and medicine. In this study, we propose a novel idea to combine static magnetic field (SMF) with CAP as a tool for cancer therapy. Breast cancer cells and wild type fibroblasts were cultured in 96-well plates and treated by CAP with or without SMF. Breast cancer cells MDA-MB-231 showed a significant decrease in viability after direct plasma treatment with SMF (compared to only plasma treatment). In addition, cancer cells treated by the CAP-SMF-activated medium (indirect treatment) also showed viability decrease but was slightly weaker than the direct plasma-SMF treatment. By integrating the use of SMF and CAP, we were able to discover their advantages that have yet to be utilized. Bioelectromagnetics. 38:53-62, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cold atmospheric plasma cancer treatment, direct versus indirect approaches

“…22,[38][39][40][41][42] The synergistic use of CAP with other methods such as nanotechnologies, extra static magnetic field, as well as a pulsed electric field will enhance the efficacy of CAP treatment. [43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50] The anti-cancer mechanism in vitro is also complicated. Based on over 400 references, some general conclusions have been made so far.…”

Sensitivity of tumor versus normal cell migration and morphology to cold atmospheric plasma‐treated media in varying culture conditions

“…A thorough review of CAP‐based cancer therapy literature (condensed version; Table S1) revealed that very different experimental conditions have been used between different laboratories, and even between different experiments in the same laboratory . While some studies solely examined the effect of CAP on one cell line, others investigated CAP selectivity between normal and disease cells .…”

“…A thorough review of CAP‐based cancer therapy literature (condensed version; Table S1) revealed that very different experimental conditions have been used between different laboratories, and even between different experiments in the same laboratory . While some studies solely examined the effect of CAP on one cell line, others investigated CAP selectivity between normal and disease cells . Many studies that utilized more than one cell line for CAP‐based experiments used the same fluid for both cell lines (Table S1), while others used different media across different cell lines (Table S1) .…”

“…While some studies solely examined the effect of CAP on one cell line, others investigated CAP selectivity between normal and disease cells . Many studies that utilized more than one cell line for CAP‐based experiments used the same fluid for both cell lines (Table S1), while others used different media across different cell lines (Table S1) . In addition, many studies that compared normal and tumor cells used cells from unmatched tissue samples .…”

“…Many studies that utilized more than one cell line for CAP‐based experiments used the same fluid for both cell lines (Table S1), while others used different media across different cell lines (Table S1) . In addition, many studies that compared normal and tumor cells used cells from unmatched tissue samples . Furthermore, a majority of previous studies used cells grown on tissue culture plastic (Table S1), where cells primarily rely on polar interactions for adhesion; however, this microenvironment is not representative of the in vivo situation, where cells typically adhere to extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins via integrins .…”