The effects of low-frequency ultrasound and microbubbles on rabbit hepatic tumors

High-intensity focused ultrasound in combination with microbubbles (MBs) is able to inhibit the growth of VX2 rabbit liver tumors in vivo and prolong the survival time of the animals. In this study, we attempt to investigate the feasibility of VX2 tumor growth inhibition using low-frequency ultrasound (US)-mediated MB disruption. Forty-eight New Zealand rabbits with hepatic VX2 tumors were divided into four groups: control, MBs group, low-frequency US group, and US + MB group. The parameters of the US were 20 kHz, 2 W/cm2, 40% duty cycle, 5 min, and once every other day for 2 weeks. At the end of the therapy experiment, 24 rabbits were euthanized, and the cancers were collected and cut into five sections for histological examination, immunohistochemistry, laser confocal microscopy, western blotting assays, and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Another 24 rabbits were saved, and overall survival time was recorded. The tumor volumes in control, MB, US, and US + MB groups were 6.36 ± 0.58, 5.68 ± 0.42, 5.29 ± 0.26, and 2.04 ± 0.14 cm3, respectively (US + MB versus the other three groups, P < 0.01). Tumor cells manifested coagulation necrosis with internal calcification. Hematoxylin and eosin (H–E) staining revealed interstitial hemorrhage and intravascular thrombosis. The intensity of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in the US + MB group in the immunohistochemical staining, laser confocal microscopy, and western blotting assays was lower than that of the other three groups (P < 0.05). TEM of the US + MB group revealed vascular endothelial cell wall rupture, widened endothelial cell gaps, interstitial erythrocyte leakage, and microvascular thrombosis, while intact vascular endothelial cells and normal erythrocytes in the tumor vessels were observed in control, MB, and US groups. Rabbits treated with US + MB had a significantly longer overall survival than those in the other three groups (χ2 = 9.328, P = 0.0242). VX2 tumor growth could be inhibited by cavitation induced using low-frequency US and MB.

[1]  G. Cravotto,et al.  On the mechanochemical activation by ultrasound. , 2013, Chemical Society reviews.

[2]  Bing Hu,et al.  Effects of low-frequency ultrasound and microbubbles on angiogenesis-associated proteins in subcutaneous tumors of nude mice. , 2013, Oncology reports.

[3]  Kullervo Hynynen,et al.  Antitumor effects of combining metronomic chemotherapy with the antivascular action of ultrasound stimulated microbubbles , 2013, International journal of cancer.

[4]  A. Novell,et al.  Irinotecan delivery by microbubble-assisted ultrasound: in vitro validation and a pilot preclinical study. , 2013, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[5]  Jingru Zhang,et al.  Cross-talk between leukemic and endothelial cells promotes angiogenesis by VEGF activation of the Notch/Dll4 pathway. , 2013, Carcinogenesis.

[6]  A. Novell,et al.  In-vivo gene delivery by sonoporation: recent progress and prospects. , 2012, Current gene therapy.

[7]  Michiel Postema,et al.  Ultrasound and microbubble-assisted gene delivery: recent advances and ongoing challenges. , 2012, Therapeutic delivery.

[8]  J. Gong,et al.  High‐intensity focused ultrasound combined with herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene‐loaded ultrasound‐targeted microbubbles improved the survival of rabbits with VX2 liver tumor , 2012, The journal of gene medicine.

[9]  G. Gravante,et al.  Targeted microbubbles in the experimental and clinical setting. , 2012, American journal of surgery.

[10]  I. Pastan,et al.  Pulsed high intensity focused ultrasound increases penetration and therapeutic efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in murine xenograft tumors. , 2012, Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society.

[11]  Y. Matsumoto,et al.  Collapse of micrometer-sized cavitation bubbles near a rigid boundary , 2012 .

[12]  Sunita Chauhan,et al.  Bio-effects and safety of low-intensity, low-frequency ultrasonic exposure. , 2012, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[13]  B. H. T. Goh,et al.  Jets in quiescent bubbles caused by a nearby oscillating bubble , 2012 .

[14]  Chih-Kuang Yeh,et al.  Ultrasound microbubble contrast agents for diagnostic and therapeutic applications: current status and future design. , 2012, Chang Gung medical journal.

[15]  P. Li,et al.  Disruption of tumor neovasculature by microbubble enhanced ultrasound: a potential new physical therapy of anti-angiogenesis. , 2012, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[16]  P. Zhong,et al.  Dynamics of tandem bubble interaction in a microfluidic channel. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Yang Guang,et al.  Diagnosis value of focal liver lesions with SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced MRI: a meta-analysis , 2011, Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology.

[18]  Timothy G. Leighton,et al.  The collapse of single bubbles and approximation of the far-field acoustic emissions for cavitation induced by shock wave lithotripsy , 2011, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[19]  S. Shoham,et al.  Intramembrane cavitation as a unifying mechanism for ultrasound-induced bioeffects , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Wayne Kreider,et al.  Blood vessel deformations on microsecond time scales by ultrasonic cavitation. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[21]  Seon-Mi Yu,et al.  Endoplasmic reticulum stress (ER-stress) by 2-deoxy-D-glucose (2DG) reduces cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression and N-glycosylation and induces a loss of COX-2 activity via a Src kinase-dependent pathway in rabbit articular chondrocytes , 2010, Experimental & Molecular Medicine.

[22]  Michael R. Bailey,et al.  Blood vessel rupture by cavitation , 2010, Urological Research.

[23]  Antonio Henrique Alves Pereira,et al.  Ultrasonic Dental Scaler Performance Assessment with an Innovative Cavitometer , 2010 .

[24]  A. Bouakaz,et al.  Acoustic microstreaming around an encapsulated particle. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  E. Stride,et al.  Cavitation and contrast: The use of bubbles in ultrasound imaging and therapy , 2010, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[26]  Conrad Coester,et al.  Microbubbles as ultrasound triggered drug carriers. , 2009, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[27]  D. Kobayashi,et al.  Acoustic cavitation as an enhancing mechanism of low-frequency sonophoresis for transdermal drug delivery. , 2009, Biological & pharmaceutical bulletin.

[28]  A. Brayman,et al.  Direct observation of microbubble interactions with ex vivo microvessels. , 2009 .

[29]  S. Gümüşlü,et al.  Cyclooxygenase-2 in Cancer and Angiogenesis , 2009, Angiology.

[30]  V. Frenkel.  Ultrasound mediated delivery of drugs and genes to solid tumors. , 2008, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[31]  Kenneth S Suslick,et al.  Inside a collapsing bubble: sonoluminescence and the conditions during cavitation. , 2008, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[32]  Yun Zhou,et al.  Dynamics of sonoporation correlated with acoustic cavitation activities. , 2008, Biophysical journal.

[33]  Nico de Jong,et al.  Sonoporation from jetting cavitation bubbles. , 2006, Biophysical journal.

[34]  Alexander L. Klibanov,et al.  Microbubble Contrast Agents: Targeted Ultrasound Imaging and Ultrasound-Assisted Drug-Delivery Applications , 2006, Investigative radiology.

[35]  Wen-Zhi Chen,et al.  Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: treatment with high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation combined with transcatheter arterial embolization. , 2005, Radiology.

[36]  Lawrence A Crum,et al.  Vascular effects induced by combined 1-MHz ultrasound and microbubble contrast agent treatments in vivo. , 2005, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[37]  Samir Mitragotri,et al.  Healing sound: the use of ultrasound in drug delivery and other therapeutic applications , 2005, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[38]  T. Kondo,et al.  Biological effects of low intensity ultrasound: the mechanism involved, and its implications on therapy and on biosafety of ultrasound. , 2004, Journal of radiation research.

[39]  Christian Greis,et al.  Technology overview: SonoVue (Bracco, Milan). , 2004, European radiology.

[40]  C. Ohl,et al.  Detachment and sonoporation of adherent HeLa-cells by shock wave-induced cavitation. , 2003, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[41]  E. Picano,et al.  In vitro modulation of intracellular oxidative stress of endothelial cells by diagnostic cardiac ultrasound. , 2003, Cardiovascular research.

[42]  Adam P Dicker,et al.  Comparing contrast-enhanced ultrasound to immunohistochemical markers of angiogenesis in a human melanoma xenograft model: preliminary results. , 2002, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[43]  Qian Wang,et al.  Pulsating Bubbles Near Boundaries , 2013 .

[44]  S. D. De Smedt,et al.  Enhancing nucleic acid delivery with ultrasound and microbubbles. , 2013, Methods in molecular biology.

[45]  Li-Ping Chen,et al.  The effect of high intensity focused ultrasound on vascular endothelial growth factor and microvessel density in rabbit V-X2 hepatocellular carcinoma models. , 2013 .

[46]  K. Tan,et al.  Vascular effects of microbubble-enhanced, pulsed, focused ultrasound on liver blood perfusion. , 2012, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[47]  R. Apfel,et al.  An improved theory for the prediction of microcavitation thresholds , 1989, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[48]  A. Zeiher,et al.  Apoptosis and Heart Failure: A Critical Review of the Literature Vascular Cell Apoptosis in Remodeling, Restenosis, and Plaque Rupture , 2022 .

[49]  E. Kahn,et al.  International Journal of Nanomedicine , 2022 .