RESUMEN
Rhabdoviral vectors can induce lysis of cancer cells. While studied almost exclusively at 37 °C, viruses are subject to a range of temperatures in vivo, including temperatures ≤31 °C. Despite potential implications, the effect of temperatures <37 °C on the performance of rhabdoviral vectors is unknown. We investigated the effect of low anatomical temperatures on two rhabdoviruses, vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) and Maraba virus (MG1). Using a metabolic resazurin assay, VSV- and MG1-mediated oncolysis was characterized in a panel of cell lines at 28, 31, 34 and 37 °C. The oncolytic ability of both viruses was hindered at 31 and 28 °C. Cold adaptation of both viruses was attempted as a mitigation strategy. Viruses were serially passaged at decreasing temperatures in an attempt to induce mutations. Unfortunately, the cold-adaptation strategies failed to potentiate the oncolytic activity of the viruses at temperatures <37 °C. Interestingly, we discovered that viral replication was unaffected at low temperatures despite the abrogation of oncolytic activity. In contrast, the proliferation of cancer cells was reduced at low temperatures. Equivalent oncolytic effects could be achieved if cells at low temperatures were treated with viruses for longer times. This suggests that rhabdovirus-mediated oncolysis could be compromised at low temperatures in vivo where therapeutic windows are limited.
Asunto(s)
Frío , Virus Oncolíticos , Rhabdoviridae , Replicación Viral , Humanos , Rhabdoviridae/fisiología , Rhabdoviridae/genética , Animales , Virus Oncolíticos/fisiología , Virus Oncolíticos/genética , Vesiculovirus/fisiología , Vesiculovirus/genética , Viroterapia Oncolítica/métodos , Línea Celular , Vectores Genéticos/genética , Línea Celular Tumoral , TemperaturaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Currently, premixed putty-type bioceramic cements (PPBCs) have become popular materials for root-end fillings. This study investigated three root-end filling techniques using PPBCs and calcium silicate-based sealers including EDTA pretreatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety root segments were prepared and standardized with an artificial fin and lateral canal, and assigned to three groups (n = 30). Root-end fillings were placed using BC-RRM Putty alone (Group PA), injection of BC sealer followed by BC-RRM Putty (Lid Technique: Group LT) or BC-RRM Putty with BC sealer coating (Deep putty packing technique: Group DP). Half of each group was pretreated with 17% EDTA. The radiographic images of the specimens were assessed by five graders and push-out bond strength tests were conducted. The data were analyzed with a general linear model including two-way ANOVA and chi-square test at a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: DP approach demonstrated significantly higher bond strength than LT (P < 0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference in bond strength between PA and either DP or LT. EDTA pretreatment had no significant effect on push-out bond strength. Radiographically, for the main canal, PA and DP scored significantly higher than LT. In the fin, PA scored significantly higher than others (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study highlights variations in root-end filling techniques. Injecting a bulk of bioceramic sealer before the placement of PPBCs may reduce bond strength and radiopacity. The application of PPBCs alone or in the deep putty technique demonstrates potential for favorable outcomes. EDTA pretreatment did not enhance bond-strength. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Careful selection and application of bioceramic materials and techniques in root-end fillings may influence the outcome of endodontic root-end surgery. When PPBCs and calcium silicate-based sealers are used together for root-end fillings, sealer followed by deep putty application may offer improved bond strength and radiographic fill compared to the lid technique.