Spatial heterogeneity and temporal kinetics of photosensitizer (AlPcS2) concentration in murine tumors RIF-1 and MTG-B.

In this study we compared the photosensitizer concentration in two experimental murine tumors using an in situ fluorescence detection instrument to examine temporal and spatial variations, after intravenous versus intratumor injection. Also, the variations in the estimate as detected by large area sampling and micro-region sampling are compared, in order to determine what the inter-tissue and inter-animal variations are, and how the method of sampling affects this estimate. The latter study was carried out ex vivo in the same tumors, which had been harvested and frozen after in vivo measurements were made. The photosensitizer, disulphonated aluminum phthalocyanine (AlPcS2) was injected either intravenously (IV) or directly into the tumor (ITu), using two murine models, MTG-B (mammary adenocarcinoma) and RIF-1 (radiation-induced fibrosarcoma) grown subcutaneously on the flank. An in situ microsampling fluorescence probe was used to assess photosensitizer concentration, through real-time measurement of the remitted intensity. The photosensitizer concentration was evaluated at 8 time endpoints between 15 min and 48 h post-injection. Inter-tumor and intra-tumor variations were assessed by repeated samples from the tumor tissues. The average photosensitizer level reaches a peak between 3 to 6 h in both tumor and normal tissues using IV administration, but peaks within 1 h following ITu administration. MTG-B tumors demonstrated a factor of 2 higher uptake than RIF-1 tumors. The pharmacokinetic uptake rates of the RIF-1 tumor were 3 times faster than for MTG-B, while there was no statistical difference in their clearance rates. Preferential uptake of AlPcS2 by both tumors compared to contra-lateral flank subcutaneous normal tissue was documented, with ITu injection exceeding IV injection by a factor of 10 in the tumor to normal tissue ratio. Inter-animal standard deviation in the mean fluorescence was near 76% for both routes of administration, but estimates of the variation within tumor were near 16% standard deviation when a large sampling volume was used. In contrast, microscopic intra-tumor standard deviation in the mean estimate was near 76%, with IV injection, indicating that high heterogeneity exists in the photosensitizer concentration on a smaller distance scale. The inter-tumor variation was reduced by ITu injection, but at the expense of increasing intra-tumor variation.

[1]  M. Korbelik,et al.  Cellular levels of photosensitisers in tumours: the role of proximity to the blood supply. , 1994, British Journal of Cancer.

[2]  G. Prout,et al.  Intratumor injection as a more effective means of porphyrin administration for photodynamic therapy. , 1987, The Journal of urology.

[3]  H. Bergh,et al.  Rapid Communication: Stability of the Fluorescence Measurement of Foscan® in the Normal Human Oral Cavity as an Indicator of its Content in Early Cancers of the Esophagus and the Bronchi , 1999, Photochemistry and photobiology.

[4]  B W Pogue,et al.  Fiber-optic bundle design for quantitative fluorescence measurement from tissue. , 1998, Applied optics.

[5]  H Anholt,et al.  Sensitizer for photodynamic therapy of cancer: A comparison of the tissue distribution of photofrin ii and aluminum phthalocyanine tetrasulfonate in nude mice bearing a human malignant tumor , 1991, International journal of cancer.

[6]  J. Gray,et al.  A new mouse tumor model system (RIF-1) for comparison of end-point studies. , 1980, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[7]  R. J. Hodgkiss,et al.  Vascular perfusion and hypoxic areas in RIF-1 tumours after photodynamic therapy. , 1996, British Journal of Cancer.

[8]  Daniel Braichotte,et al.  Clinical pharmacokinetic studies of tetra(meta‐hydroxyphenyl)chlorin in squamous cell carcinoma by fluorescence spectroscopy at 2 wavelengths , 1995, International journal of cancer.

[9]  R K Jain,et al.  Barriers to drug delivery in solid tumors. , 1994, Scientific American.

[10]  J. Shulok,et al.  Photodynamic effect in an experimental bladder tumor treated with intratumor injection of hematoporphyrin derivative. , 1988, Cancer research.

[11]  C. Hadjur,et al.  Pharmacokinetics of Tetra (m‐hydroxyphenyl)chlorin in Human Plasma and Individualized Light Dosimetry in Photodynamic Therapy , 1998, Photochemistry and photobiology.

[12]  W. Grundfest,et al.  Photodynamic therapy of choriocarcinoma transplanted to the hamster cheek pouch. I. Intraperitoneal photosensitization. , 1990, Gynecologic oncology.

[13]  T. Wieman,et al.  Vascular damage after photodynamic therapy of solid tumors: a view and comparison of effect in pre-clinical and clinical models at the University of Louisville. , 2000, In vivo.

[14]  B. Henderson,et al.  Implications of a pre-existing tumor hypoxic fraction on photodynamic therapy. , 1992, The Journal of surgical research.

[15]  Q. Peng,et al.  Uptake and distribution of intravenously or intravesically administered photosensitizers in the rat. , 1993, Cancer letters.

[16]  Gregory C. Burke,et al.  Comparison of Photosensitizer (AlPcS2) Quantification Techniques: In Situ Fluorescence Microsampling Versus Tissue Chemical Extraction¶ , 2001, Photochemistry and photobiology.

[17]  D. Kessel IN VIVO FLUORESCENCE OF TUMORS AFTER TREATMENT WITH DERIVATIVES OF HEMATOPORPHYRIN , 1986, Photochemistry and photobiology.

[18]  B. Fenton,et al.  Vascular morphometry of KHT and RIF-1 murine sarcomas. , 1993, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[19]  D. Kessel,et al.  Tumor versus vascular photodamage in a rat tumor model. , 1998, Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology.

[20]  T. Hasan,et al.  Comparison of intravenous and intravesical administration of chloro-aluminum sulfonated phthalocyanine for photodynamic treatment in a rat bladder cancer model. , 1992, The Journal of urology.

[21]  I. Driver,et al.  Tumor vascular shutdown following photodynamic therapy based on polyhematoporphyrin or 5-aminolevulinic Acid. , 1994, International journal of oncology.

[22]  D. Noske,et al.  Photodynamic therapy of malignant glioma A review of literature , 1991, Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery.

[23]  B. Wilson,et al.  Photodynamic therapy: light delivery and dosage for second-generation photosensitizers. , 2007, Ciba Foundation symposium.

[24]  R K Jain,et al.  Transport of fluid and macromolecules in tumors. I. Role of interstitial pressure and convection. , 1989, Microvascular research.

[25]  F. Al-Watban Photodynamic therapy: Tumor volume limitation and tumor response for murine fibrosarcoma , 1990, Lasers in surgery and medicine.

[26]  J. Frisoli,et al.  Pharmacokinetics of a fluorescent drug using laser-induced fluorescence. , 1993, Cancer research.