Relationship between Energy Dosage and Apoptotic Cell Death by Modulated Electro-Hyperthermia
Patrick Hung-Ju Kao,Chia-Hung Chen,Yuk-Wah Tsang,Chen-Si Lin,Hsin-Chien Chiang,Cheng-Chung Huang,Mau-Shin Chi,Kai-Lin Yang,Wen-Tyng Li,Shang-Jyh Kao,Carrie Anne Minnaar,Kwan-Hwa Chi,Yu-Shan Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65823-2
2020-06-02
Abstract:Modulated electro-hyperthermia (mEHT) is a form of mild hyperthermia (HT) used for cancer treatment. The principle utility of HT is the ability not only to increase cell temperature, but also to increase blood flow and associated pO2 to the microenvironment. While investigational evidence has shown the unique ability of mEHT to elicit apoptosis in cancer cells, in vivo and in vitro, the same trait has not been observed with conventional HT. There is dissension as to what allows mEHT to elicit apoptosis despite heating to only mild temperatures, with the predominant opinion in favor of increased temperature at a cellular level as the driving force. For this study, we hypothesized that in addition to temperature, the amount of electrical energy delivered is a major factor in induction of apoptosis by mEHT. To evaluate the impact of electrical energy on apoptosis, we divided generally practiced mEHT treatment into 3 phases: Phase I (treatment start to 10 min. mark): escalation from 25 °C to 37 °C Phase II (10 min. mark to 15 min. mark): escalation from 37 °C to 42 °C Phase III (15 min. mark to 45 min. mark): maintenance at 42 °C Combinations of mEHT at 18 W power, mEHT at 7.5 W power, water bath, and incubator were applied to each of the three phases. Power output was recorded per second and calculated as average power per second. Total number of corresponding Joules emitted per each experiment was also recorded. The biological effect of apoptotic cell death was assayed by annexin-V assay. In group where mEHT was applied for all three phases, apoptosis rate was measured at 31.18 ± 1.47%. In group where mEHT was only applied in Phases II and III, apoptosis rate dropped to 20.2 ± 2.1%. Where mEHT was only applied in Phase III, apoptosis was 6.4 ± 1.7%. Interestingly, when mEHT was applied in Phases I and II, whether Phase III was conducted in either water bath at 42 °C or incubator at 37 °C, resulted in nearly identical apoptosis rates, 26 ± 4.4% and 25.9 ± 3.1%, respectively. These results showed that accumulation of mEHT at high-powered setting (18 W/sec) during temperature escalation (Phase I and Phase II), significantly increased apoptosis of tested cancer cells. The data also showed that whereas apoptosis rate was significantly increased during temperature escalation by higher power (18 W/sec), apoptosis was limited during temperature maintenance with lower power (7.5 W/sec). This presents that neither maintenance of 42 °C nor accumulation of Joules by mEHT has immediate correlating effect on apoptosis rate. These findings may offer a basis for direction of clinical application of mEHT treatment.