HIGHLIGHTS: • Intrabeam x-ray source and spherical applicators were simulated and skin dose was calculated. • Skin dose for constant skin to applicator distance strongly depends on applicator size. • Use of larger applicators generally results in higher skin dose. • The recommended 0.5-1 cm skin to applicator distance does not guarantee skin safety.
Objective: In this study, bystander effects in MCF-7 breast cancer cells and hFOB 1.19 normal osteoblast cells irradiated with gamma emitting HDR Brachytherapy Ir-192 source were investigated.
Material and Methods: In this in-vitro study, bystander effect stimulation was conducted using medium transfer technique of irradiated cells to the non-irradiated bystander cells. Cell viability, reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and colony forming assay was employed to evaluate the effect.
Results: Results indicate that the exposure to the medium irradiated MCF-7 induced significant bystander killing and decreased the survival fraction of bystander MCF-7 and hFOB from 1.19 to 81.70 % and 65.44 %, respectively. A significant decrease in survival fraction was observed for hFOB 1.19 bystander cells (p < 0.05). We found that the rate of hFOB 1.19 cell growth significantly decreases to 85.5% when added with media from irradiated cells. The ROS levels of bystander cells for both cell lines were observed to have an increase even after 4 h of treatment. Our results suggest the presence of bystander effects in unirradiated cells exposed to the irradiated medium.
Conclusion: These data provide evidence that irradiated MCF-7 breast cancer cells can induce bystander death in unirradiated MCF-7 and hFOB 1.19 bystander cells. Increase in cell death could also be mediated by the ROS generation during the irradiation with HDR brachytherapy.
METHODS: Dose measurement of a standard pear-shaped plan carried out in phantom to verify the MOSkin dose measurement accuracy. With MOSkin attached to the third diode, RP3 of the PTW 9112, both detectors were inserted into patients' rectum. The RP3 and MOSkin measured doses in 18 sessions as well as the maximum measured doses from PTW 9112, RPmax in 48 sessions were compared to the planned doses.
RESULTS: Percentage dose differences ΔD (%) in phantom study for two MOSkin found to be 2.22 ± 0.07% and 2.5 ± 0.07%. IVD of 18 sessions resulted in ΔD(%) of -16.3% to 14.9% with MOSkin and ΔD(%) of -35.7% to -2.1% with RP3. In 48 sessions, RPmax recorded ΔD(%) of -37.1% to 11.0%. MOSkin_measured doses were higher in 44.4% (8/18) sessions, while RP3_measured were lower than planned doses in all sessions. RPmax_measured were lower in 87.5% of applications (42/47).
CONCLUSIONS: The delivered doses proven to deviate from planned doses due to unavoidable shift between imaging and treatment as measured with MOSkin and PTW 9112 detectors. The integration of MOSkin on commercial PTW 9112 surface found to be feasible for rectal dose IVD during cervical HDR ICBT.
Methods: In this study, individual BiONPs, Cis, and BRF, as well as combinations of BiONPs-Cis (BC), BiONPs-BRF (BB) and BiONPs-Cis-BRF (BCB) were treated to the cells before irradiation using HDR brachytherapy with 0.38 MeV iridium-192 source, 6 MV photon beam and 6 MeV electron beam. The individual or synergetic effects from the application of the treatment components during the radiotherapy were elucidated by quantifying the ROS generation and radiosensitization effects on MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell lines as well as NIH/3T3 normal cell line.
Results: The ROS generated in the presence of Cis stimulated the most substantial amount of ROS compared to the BiONPs and BRF. Meanwhile, the combination of the components had induced the higher ROS levels for photon beam than the brachytherapy and electron beam. The highest ROS enhancement relative to the control is attributable to the presence of BC combination in MDA-MB-231 cells, in comparison to the BB and BCB combinations. The radiosensitization effects which were quantified using the sensitization enhancement ratio (SER) indicate the highest value by BC in MCF-7 cells, followed by BCB and BB treatment. The radiosensitization effects are found to be more prominent for brachytherapy in comparison to photon and electron beam.
Conclusion: The BiONPs, Cis and BRF are the potential radiosensitizers that could improve the efficiency of radiotherapy to eradicate the cancer cells. The combination of these potent radiosensitizers might produce multiple effects when applied in radiotherapy. The BC combination is found to have the highest SER, followed by the BCB combination. This study is also the first to investigate the effect of BRF in combination with BiONPs (BB) and BC (BCB) treatments.