The balance between normal and tumor tissues in phototherapy of tissues harboring cancer

Mechanism of action of photobiomodulation with light-emitting diode on the glutamine-dependent CT26 cell

We investigated the mechanism of action of photobiomodulation (PBM) with light-emitting diode (led) 640 nm of glutamine-dependent CT26 cells. Cells were exposed to 0.147-10.979 mW/cm2 of 640 ± 15 nm laser light for 15 min/day for 10 days. Cell proliferation and apoptosis were detected by MTT (3-(4,5)-dimethylthiahiazo (-z-y1)-3,5-diphenytetrazoliumromide) and annexin V-FITC assays. mRNA and protein levels of cell proliferation-related genes were measured by RT-PCR and western blotting, respectively. With Gln 7.94 mM, on Day 8 and 10, genes GLUT1, MEK1, ERK2, BCL2, E2F1, HO-1, Ctnnb1, and Per2 was significantly upregulated (p < 0.01) of glutamine addiction. In PBM therapy, compared with the non-illuminated group, 2.17 mW/cm2 can significantly reduce cell apoptosis, the mRNA level of gene mTOR1 was significantly upregulated, and the protein level of raptor of GLUT1 and mTOR1, MEK1/2, and ERK1/2 were upregulated. LED 640 nm inhibits cell apoptosis without increasing cell proliferation by regulating GLUT1, MEK/ERK, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR signals.

Photomodulation of the osteoclastogenic potential of oral squamous carcinoma cells

The treatment for oral cancer usually involves surgical excision followed by chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The combination of these therapies generally promotes a serious inflammation of the mucosa of the digestive tract, denominated mucositis, which compromises continuity of treatment. Photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy has been used successfully to reduce the oral mucositis, however there is still some controversy regarding the effects of this therapy on unintentionally irradiated tumor cells that may remain after cancer treatment. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of PBM therapy (using parameters for mucositis) on the modulation of osteoclastogenic potential of a cell line derived from human lingual squamous cell carcinoma (SCC9). Previously irradiated SCC9 cells were co-cultured with human osteoclast precursors. Co-cultures performed with non-irradiated SCC9 cells served as control. After 7, 14 and 21 days the co-cultures were evaluated for the tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) activity, an osteoclastogenic marker. Additionally, the monocultures of SCC9 cells (non-irradiated and irradiated) were analyzed for cell viability/proliferation and for the expression of IL-11 and PTHrP. The irradiation of SCC9 cells with PBM with an energy density of 4 J/cm² decreased the pro-osteoclastogenic potential of those cells. This may represent a potential useful side effect of PBM therapy. PBM (using recommended parameters for mucositis treatment) decreases the osteoclastogenic potential of oral squamous carcinoma cells.

Low level laser therapy/photobiomodulation in the management of side effects of chemoradiation therapy in head and neck cancer: part 1: mechanisms of action, dosimetric, and safety considerations

PURPOSE

There is a large body of evidence supporting the efficacy of low level laser therapy (LLLT), more recently termed photobiomodulation (PBM), for the management of oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC). Recent advances in PBM technology, together with a better understanding of mechanisms involved, may expand the applications for PBM in the management of other complications associated with HNC treatment. This article (part 1) describes PBM mechanisms of action, dosimetry, and safety aspects and, in doing so, provides a basis for a companion paper (part 2) which describes the potential breadth of potential applications of PBM in the management of side-effects of (chemo)radiation therapy in patients being treated for HNC and proposes PBM parameters.

METHODS

This study is a narrative non-systematic review.

RESULTS

We review PBM mechanisms of action and dosimetric considerations. Virtually, all conditions modulated by PBM (e.g., ulceration, inflammation, lymphedema, pain, fibrosis, neurological and muscular injury) are thought to be involved in the pathogenesis of (chemo)radiation therapy-induced complications in patients treated for HNC. The impact of PBM on tumor behavior and tumor response to treatment has been insufficiently studied. In vitro studies assessing the effect of PBM on tumor cells report conflicting results, perhaps attributable to inconsistencies of PBM power and dose. Nonetheless, the biological bases for the broad clinical activities ascribed to PBM have also been noted to be similar to those activities and pathways associated with negative tumor behaviors and impeded response to treatment. While there are no anecdotal descriptions of poor tumor outcomes in patients treated with PBM, confirming its neutrality with respect to cancer responsiveness is a critical priority.

CONCLUSION

Based on its therapeutic effects, PBM may have utility in a broad range of oral, oropharyngeal, facial, and neck complications of HNC treatment. Although evidence suggests that PBM using LLLT is safe in HNC patients, more research is imperative and vigilance remains warranted to detect any potential adverse effects of PBM on cancer treatment outcomes and survival.

Low level laser therapy/photobiomodulation in the management of side effects of chemoradiation therapy in head and neck cancer: part 1: mechanisms of action, dosimetric, and safety considerations

PURPOSE

There is a large body of evidence supporting the efficacy of low level laser therapy (LLLT), more recently termed photobiomodulation (PBM), for the management of oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC). Recent advances in PBM technology, together with a better understanding of mechanisms involved, may expand the applications for PBM in the management of other complications associated with HNC treatment. This article (part 1) describes PBM mechanisms of action, dosimetry, and safety aspects and, in doing so, provides a basis for a companion paper (part 2) which describes the potential breadth of potential applications of PBM in the management of side-effects of (chemo)radiation therapy in patients being treated for HNC and proposes PBM parameters.

METHODS

This study is a narrative non-systematic review.

RESULTS

We review PBM mechanisms of action and dosimetric considerations. Virtually, all conditions modulated by PBM (e.g., ulceration, inflammation, lymphedema, pain, fibrosis, neurological and muscular injury) are thought to be involved in the pathogenesis of (chemo)radiation therapy-induced complications in patients treated for HNC. The impact of PBM on tumor behavior and tumor response to treatment has been insufficiently studied. In vitro studies assessing the effect of PBM on tumor cells report conflicting results, perhaps attributable to inconsistencies of PBM power and dose. Nonetheless, the biological bases for the broad clinical activities ascribed to PBM have also been noted to be similar to those activities and pathways associated with negative tumor behaviors and impeded response to treatment. While there are no anecdotal descriptions of poor tumor outcomes in patients treated with PBM, confirming its neutrality with respect to cancer responsiveness is a critical priority.

CONCLUSION

Based on its therapeutic effects, PBM may have utility in a broad range of oral, oropharyngeal, facial, and neck complications of HNC treatment. Although evidence suggests that PBM using LLLT is safe in HNC patients, more research is imperative and vigilance remains warranted to detect any potential adverse effects of PBM on cancer treatment outcomes and survival.