de Bruijn Henriëtte S, Meijers Carel, van der Ploeg-van den Heuvel Angélique, Sterenborg Henricus J C M, Robinson Dominic J
Center for Optical Diagnostics and Therapy, Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC, Room Wk-319, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J Photochem Photobiol B. 2008 Aug 21;92(2):91-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2008.05.005. Epub 2008 May 15.
Light fractionation does not enhance the response to photodynamic therapy (PDT) after topical methyl-aminolevulinate (MAL) application, whereas it is after topical 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA). The differences in biophysical and biochemical characteristics between MAL and ALA may result in differences in localisation that cause the differences in response to PDT. We therefore investigated the spatial distribution of protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) fluorescence in normal mouse skin using fluorescence microscopy and correlated that with the PDT response histologically observed at 2.5, 24 and 48 h after PDT. As expected high fluorescence intensities were observed in the epidermis and pilosebaceous units and no fluorescence in the cutaneous musculature after both MAL and ALA application. The dermis showed localised fluorescence that corresponds to the cytoplasma of dermal cells like fibroblast and mast cells. Spectral analysis showed a typical PpIX fluorescence spectrum confirming that it is PpIX fluorescence. There was no clear difference in the depth and spatial distribution of PpIX fluorescence between the two precursors in these normal mouse skin samples. This result combined with the conclusion of Moan et al. that ALA but not MAL is systemically distributed after topical application on mouse skin [Moan et al., Pharmacology of protoporphyrin IX in nude mice after application of ALA and ALA esters, Int. J. Cancer 103 (2003) 132-135] suggests that endothelial cells are involved in increased response of tissues to ALA-PDT using light fractionation. Histological analysis 2.5h after PDT showed more edema formation after ALA-PDT compared to MAL-PDT that was not accompanied by a difference in the inflammatory response. This suggests that endothelial cells respond differently to ALA and MAL-PDT. Further investigation is needed to determine the role of endothelial cells in ALA-PDT and the underlying mechanism behind the increased effectiveness of light fractionation using a dark interval of 2h found after ALA but not after MAL-PDT.
局部应用甲基氨基乙酰丙酸(MAL)后,分次照射并不能增强光动力疗法(PDT)的疗效,而局部应用5-氨基乙酰丙酸(ALA)后则可以增强。MAL和ALA在生物物理和生化特性上的差异可能导致其在体内分布的差异,进而引起对PDT反应的不同。因此,我们使用荧光显微镜研究了正常小鼠皮肤中原卟啉IX(PpIX)荧光的空间分布,并将其与PDT后2.5、24和48小时组织学观察到的PDT反应相关联。正如预期的那样,局部应用MAL和ALA后,在表皮和毛囊皮脂腺单位中均观察到高荧光强度,而在皮肤肌肉组织中未观察到荧光。真皮显示出局部荧光,这与成纤维细胞和肥大细胞等真皮细胞的细胞质相对应。光谱分析显示典型的PpIX荧光光谱,证实其为PpIX荧光。在这些正常小鼠皮肤样本中,两种前体之间PpIX荧光的深度和空间分布没有明显差异。这一结果与Moan等人的结论相结合,即在小鼠皮肤局部应用后,ALA会全身分布而MAL不会[Moan等人,应用ALA和ALA酯后裸鼠中原卟啉IX的药理学,国际癌症杂志103(2003)132-135],表明内皮细胞参与了使用分次照射的组织对ALA-PDT反应的增强。PDT后2.5小时的组织学分析显示,与MAL-PDT相比,ALA-PDT后形成的水肿更多,且炎症反应无差异。这表明内皮细胞对ALA和MAL-PDT的反应不同。需要进一步研究以确定内皮细胞在ALA-PDT中的作用以及在ALA-PDT后(而非MAL-PDT后)发现的2小时暗间隔分次照射有效性增加背后的潜在机制。