Hundt Walter, O'Connell-Rodwell Caitlin E, Bednarski Mark D, Steinbach Silke, Guccione Samira
Department of Radiology, Lucas MRS Research Center, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Acad Radiol. 2007 Jul;14(7):859-70. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2007.04.008.
In this study, we compared the effect of focused ultrasound with the effect of thermal stress on the induction of a heat inducible promoter in an in vitro model using three tumor cell lines (M21, SCCVII, and NIH3T3).
We used a reporter construct that was generated using the stress-inducible promoter from the gene encoding a murine 70-kilodalton heat shock protein (Hsp70A.1) and a luciferase (luc) reporter plasmid. High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) was applied in two different modes. In the first mode, an increasing voltage at constant pulse duration and in the second mode a constant voltage at increasing pulse duration was applied. HIFU or thermal stress was delivered over a range of temperatures (36-52 degrees C) for 5 minutes, and resulting luciferase activity was measured in live cells using a cooled charge-coupled device camera as a measure of reporter gene transcription. Luciferase activity was measured at set time intervals for a total of 108 hours post-stress.
Both methods induced the hsp70 promoter; however, the luciferase activity under the influence of HIFU, independent of the applied mode, and thermal stress differs despite the fact that the temperature was the same. In the M21 tumor cell line, the maximum luciferase activity after focused ultrasound application was 4818 +/- 1521% at a temperature of 48 degrees C and after thermal stress 4468.2 +/- 1890.2% at a temperature of 52 degrees C with a viability of 72.3 +/- 5.2% and 85 +/- 3.4%, respectively. In the SCC tumor cell line, the maximum luciferase activity after focused ultrasound application was 6743.0 +/- 3281.4% and after only thermal stress exposure was 3910.6 +/- 2189.0% at a temperature of 44 degrees C and 50 degrees C, respectively. At the highest luciferase activity, the portion of vital cells was 72.5 +/- 8.4% and 72.5 +/- 5.9% respectively. In the NIH3T3 tumor cell line the highest luciferase activity of 428510.6 +/- 26526.8% was seen at a temperature of 42 degrees C applying focused ultrasound. Under thermal stress it was 29221.3 +/- 7205.0% at a temperature of 50 degrees C. At the highest luciferase activity, the viability analysis showed 75.3 +/- 9.2% and 72.3 +/- 7.9% viable cells, respectively.
Focused ultrasound induces hsp70 expression like thermal stress alone; however, HIFU is capable of inducing expression at lower temperatures than heat stress alone, indicating that nonthermal effects also play a role on the induction of hsp70.
在本研究中,我们在体外模型中使用三种肿瘤细胞系(M21、SCCVII和NIH3T3),比较了聚焦超声与热应激对热诱导启动子诱导作用的影响。
我们使用了一个报告构建体,它是由编码小鼠70千道尔顿热休克蛋白(Hsp70A.1)的基因的应激诱导启动子和一个荧光素酶(luc)报告质粒构建而成。高强度聚焦超声(HIFU)以两种不同模式施加。在第一种模式下,在恒定脉冲持续时间下增加电压,在第二种模式下,在增加脉冲持续时间下施加恒定电压。HIFU或热应激在一系列温度(36 - 52摄氏度)下持续5分钟,然后使用冷却电荷耦合器件相机在活细胞中测量产生的荧光素酶活性,以此作为报告基因转录的指标。在应激后总共108小时内,按设定的时间间隔测量荧光素酶活性。
两种方法均诱导了hsp70启动子;然而,尽管温度相同,但在聚焦超声影响下(与应用模式无关)的荧光素酶活性与热应激下的不同。在M21肿瘤细胞系中,聚焦超声作用后,在48摄氏度时荧光素酶活性最高为4818±1521%,热应激后在52摄氏度时为4468.2±1890.2%,细胞活力分别为72.3±5.2%和85±3.4%。在SCC肿瘤细胞系中,聚焦超声作用后,在44摄氏度时荧光素酶活性最高为6743.0±3281.4%,仅热应激暴露后在50摄氏度时为3910.6±2189.0%。在荧光素酶活性最高时,活细胞比例分别为72.5±8.4%和72.5±5.9%。在NIH3T3肿瘤细胞系中,施加聚焦超声在42摄氏度时荧光素酶活性最高达428510.6±26526.8%。热应激下在50摄氏度时为29221.3±7205.0%。在荧光素酶活性最高时,活力分析显示活细胞分别为75.3±9.2%和72.3±7.9%。
聚焦超声像单独热应激一样诱导hsp70表达;然而,与单独热应激相比,HIFU能够在更低温度下诱导表达,这表明非热效应在hsp70的诱导中也起作用。