RESUMO
Photodynamic therapy is an alternative treatment mainly for cancer but also for bacterial infections. This treatment dates back to 1900 when a German medical school graduate Oscar Raab found a photodynamic effect while doing research for his doctoral dissertation with Professor Hermann von Tappeiner. Unexpectedly, Raab revealed that the toxicity of acridine on paramecium depends on the intensity of light in his laboratory. Photodynamic therapy is therefore based on the administration of a photosensitizer with subsequent light irradiation within the absorption maxima of this substance followed by reactive oxygen species formation and finally cell death. Although this treatment is not a novelty, there is an endeavor for various modifications to the therapy. For example, selectivity and efficiency of the photosensitizer, as well as irradiation with various types of light sources are still being modified to improve final results of the photodynamic therapy. The main aim of this review is to summarize anticancer and antibacterial modifications, namely various compounds, approaches, and techniques, to enhance the effectiveness of photodynamic therapy.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Fotoquimioterapia , Humanos , Fármacos Fotossensibilizantes/farmacologia , Fármacos Fotossensibilizantes/uso terapêutico , Fotoquimioterapia/métodos , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/farmacologia , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Morte Celular , Espécies Reativas de Oxigênio/metabolismoRESUMO
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a non-invasive therapy that has made significant progress in treating different diseases, including cancer, by utilizing new nanotechnology products such as graphene and its derivatives. Graphene-based materials have large surface area and photothermal effects thereby making them suitable candidates for PDT or photo-active drug carriers. The remarkable photophysical properties of graphene derivates facilitate the efficient generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) upon light irradiation, which destroys cancer cells. Surface functionalization of graphene and its materials can also enhance their biocompatibility and anticancer activity. The paper delves into the distinct roles played by graphene-based materials in PDT such as photosensitizers (PS) and drug carriers while at the same time considers how these materials could be used to circumvent cancer resistance. This will provide readers with an extensive discussion of various pathways contributing to PDT inefficiency. Consequently, this comprehensive review underscores the vital roles that graphene and its derivatives may play in emerging PDT strategies for cancer treatment and other medical purposes. With a better comprehension of the current state of research and the existing challenges, the integration of graphene-based materials in PDT holds great promise for developing targeted, effective, and personalized cancer treatments.
Assuntos
Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos , Grafite , Neoplasias , Fotoquimioterapia , Fármacos Fotossensibilizantes , Espécies Reativas de Oxigênio , Grafite/química , Grafite/farmacologia , Fotoquimioterapia/métodos , Humanos , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Fármacos Fotossensibilizantes/química , Fármacos Fotossensibilizantes/farmacologia , Espécies Reativas de Oxigênio/metabolismo , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos/efeitos dos fármacos , Portadores de Fármacos/química , AnimaisRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Precise control over the ultrasound field parameters experienced by biological samples during sonication experiments in vitro may be quite challenging. The main goal of this work was to outline an approach to construction of sonication test cells that would minimize the interaction between the test cells and ultrasound. METHODS: Optimal dimensions of the test cell were determined through measurements conducted in a water sonication tank using 3D-printed test objects. The offset of local acoustic intensity variability inside the sonication test cell was set to value of ±50% of the reference value (i.e., local acoustic intensity measured at last axial maximum in the free-field condition). The cytotoxicity of several materials used for 3D printing was determined using the MTT (3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5 diphenyl tetrazolium bromide) assay. RESULTS: The sonication test cells were 3D printed from polylactic acid material, which was not toxic to the cells. Silicone membrane HT-6240, which was used to construct the bottom of the test cell, was found to reduce ultrasound energy minimally. Final ultrasound profiles inside the sonication test cells indicated the desired variability of local acoustic intensity. The cell viability in our sonication test cell was comparable to that of commercial culture plates with bottoms constructed with silicone membrane. CONCLUSION: An approach to construction of sonication test cells minimizing the interaction of the test cell and ultrasound has been outlined.