Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Review ArticleReviewsR

Sono-Photodynamic Combination Therapy: A Review on Sensitizers

KRISHNA CHAITANYA SADANALA, PANKAJ KUMAR CHATURVEDI, YOU MI SEO, JEUNG MO KIM, YONG SAM JO, YANG KOO LEE and WOONG SHICK AHN
Anticancer Research September 2014, 34 (9) 4657-4664;
KRISHNA CHAITANYA SADANALA
1Integrated Omics Institute, Wonkwang University, Seoul, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
PANKAJ KUMAR CHATURVEDI
1Integrated Omics Institute, Wonkwang University, Seoul, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YOU MI SEO
1Integrated Omics Institute, Wonkwang University, Seoul, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JEUNG MO KIM
1Integrated Omics Institute, Wonkwang University, Seoul, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YONG SAM JO
1Integrated Omics Institute, Wonkwang University, Seoul, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YANG KOO LEE
2Dongsung Pharmaceuticals, Seoul, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
WOONG SHICK AHN
1Integrated Omics Institute, Wonkwang University, Seoul, South Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: ahnws4120@yahoo.co.kr
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Cancer is characterized by the dysregulation of cell signaling pathways at several steps. The majority of current anticancer therapies involve the modulation of a single target. A tumor-targeting drug-delivery system consists of a tumor detection moiety and a cytotoxic material joined directly or through a suitable linker to form a conjugate. Photodynamic therapy has been used for more than 100 years to treat tumors. One of the present goals of photodynamic therapy research is to enhance the selective targeting of tumor cells in order to reduce the risk and extension of unwanted side-effects, caused by normal cell damage. Sonodynamic therapy is a promising new treatment for patients with cancer. It treats cancer with ultrasound and sonosensitive agents. Porphyrin compounds often serve as photosensitive and sonosensitive agents. The combination of these two methods makes cancer treatment more effective. The present review provides an overview of photodynamic therapy, sonodynamic therapy, sono-photodynamic therapy and the four sensitizers which are suitable candidates for combined sono-photodynamic therapy.

  • Photodynamic therapy
  • sonodynamic therapy
  • sensitizer
  • sono-photodynamic therapy
  • review

Cancer is a collection of over 100 diseases affecting all body organs. A single type of cancer presents itself differently in different individuals. The disease is a malfunction of the biochemical and signaling networks that drive the normal cell. The cell accumulates mutations and epigenetic changes gradually, which alter the signaling and biochemical networks. Certain combinations of these alterations lead to cellular transformation and cancer (1). Signal transduction explains the conversion of external signals, generated by hormones, growth factors, neurotransmitters, chemokines, cytokines and even small molecules such as ATP, to a biochemical response, leading to a cellular response. These responses can lead to changes in metabolism, gene expression, cell division and cell death (2). The process can start at the cell membrane or inside the cell, leading to an array of biochemical reactions based on the signaling system (3). Recent reviews suggest that signal transduction therapy was implemented after the recognition of tyrosine phosphorylation as a key signaling event in incompetence in 1980 (4). Signal transduction therapy is generally thought of in relation to cancer therapy. This is because the most revolutionary developments in molecular, cellular biology are strongly related to cancer and carcinogenesis (5).

Phosphorylation is the most frequent post-translational modification of proteins and is intimately involved with several signal transduction processes (6).

Solid tumors are composed of two mutually-dependent compartments, the malignant cells and the tumor microenvironment, which includes the extracellular matrix, stromal cells and blood vessels (7). Inhibition of the stromal components that maintain the tumor is a valid strategy, if one can limit the lethal effects. One significant target is angiogenesis, i.e. the formation of new blood vessels (8).

There are four major types of cancer treatment: surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. These therapies can be used either alone or in combination with each other (9). Many new treatments, including cancer vaccines and gene therapy, are being studied in clinical trials (10). Cancer chemotherapy has been one of the most important medical advances (11). Conventional cancer chemotherapy relies on the principle that rapidly proliferating cancer cells are more likely to be killed by cytotoxic agents. In contrast, targeted-therapy, introduced in recent years, is directed against cancer-specific molecules and signaling pathways and therefore has more limited non-specific toxicities (12). Tumor cells overexpress many receptors and biomarkers which can be used as targets to deliver cytotoxic agents into tumors (13). Tumor-targeting drug conjugates include monoclonal antibodies, polyunsaturated fatty acids, folic acid, hyaluronic acid, oligopeptides as tumor-targeting moieties, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (14). In addition to targeted chemotherapy, another effective treatment of tumors is photodynamic therapy (PDT). PDT is a treatment that uses a drug, called a photosensitizer or photosensitizing agent, and a particular kind of light (15-17). When photosensitizers are exposed to a specific wavelength of light (18), they generate a form of oxygen that kills nearby cells (19). Sonodynamic therapy (SDT) has been developed as a complementary and alternative therapy to PDT. It treats cancer by means of ultrasound and sonosensitive agents (20).

PDT

PDT has been used for more than 100 years to treat tumors. With suitable sensitizers, it has high efficacy, high selectivity, and few side-effects. There are good prospects for its broad clinical applications (21-23). PDT is carried-out in two steps, firstly by injecting or orally administering a photosensitive agent to a patient, and then activating the photosensitive agent by exposing the patient to light at an appropriate wavelength to produce singlet oxygen, thereby killing abnormal cells and microorganisms (24). Treatment with photosensitive compounds with an affinity for tumor cells allows for whole-body irradiation without damage to surrounding non-diseased cells. Photoporphyrins such as porphyrins, are molecules that produce active oxygen species after activation of the visible light wave range, and are widely used in PDT of cancer and other clinical conditions (25, 26). Chlorin e6 is a hydrophilic sensitizer derived from porphyrin (27). Chlorine e6 was found to have significantly higher photosensitizing activity of conjugates containing specific ligands, such as insulin, konkonavalin or folic acid, and thus is able to internalize receptor-expressing cells (28). Chlorine e6 has been shown to accumulate more effectively in tumors, absorb more strongly at longer wavelengths (670 nm) (29), be cleared faster from an organism, and can be activated by both light and ultrasound (30). PDT has the following advantages (31-35): (i) minimally-invasive nature, (ii) selectivity of the area of interest, and (iii) the ability to treat patients with repeated doses without initiating resistance or exceeding total dose limitations (as associated with radiotherapy).

SDT

SDT has been developed as a complementary or alternative therapy to PDT. It treats cancer by means of ultrasound and sonosensitive agents (30, 33-37). SDT is a procedure that uses ultrasound and a sonosensitizing compound that becomes cytotoxic upon exposure to ultrasound in order to treat cancer. It is similar to PDT in its advantage of low toxicity. The mechanism used is that ultrasound activates the sonosensitive agent in the body to generate singlet oxygen, thus killing abnormal cells such as tumor cells. Unlike PDT using light which has limited penetration, sound is able to penetrate deep into the body to reach interior tumors (20). Ultrasound is a mechanical wave with periodic vibrations of particles in a continuous, elastic medium at frequencies of 20 kHz or more. It is not only perceived as safe, but has exceptional tissue-penetrating ability without major attenuation of its energy (38, 39). The effect can be localized by focusing the ultrasound on a specific region and choosing compounds with tumor affinity (40-42).

PDT and SDT: Comparison

Tumor-localizing porphyrin compounds were some of the first compounds used in the modern approach of SDT. Unlike chemotherapeutic compounds, porphyrins are non-cytotoxic in the absence of ultrasound. These compounds first found application in a method of treatment that is in some ways similar to SDT, PDT. PDT uses definite wavelengths of red light to activate the cytotoxic activity of photosensitive compounds. The application of PDT to tumor treatment is limited by the wavelength of red light, which only allows for limited tissue penetration (43). As a result, PDT can only treat superficial tumors that are at most 5 to 7 mm from the surface of the skin (44). Deeper tumors may be treated with interstitial irradiation; however, the minimal-invasive nature of PDT can be a hindrance to the procedure. However, this includes the typical non-invasive nature of PDT (45). SDT overcomes the shortcomings of PDT because the properties of ultrasound allow it to travel easily through many centimeters of tissue, allowing for the treatment of deeper tissues (46). Like high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment and other treatments utilizing the thermal effects of ultrasound, focused ultrasound is used in SDT to target a specific area and protect surrounding non-diseased tissues from activated sonosensitizers (47, 48). A targeted-approach works well for the treatment of solid tumors (49, 50). Porphyrin compounds have been used as photosensitive and sonosensitive agents (51). They selectively adhere to abnormal cells such as tumor cells.

Sono-PDT

Sono-PDT is a safe, non-toxic and non-invasive way of destroying cancer cells, as well as of enhancing immune protective function. This treatment uses the light of a particular wavelength and sound of a particular frequency to activate a light- and sonosensitive material which attaches selectively to tumor cells, causing their breakdown (52).

Both SDT and PDT have been used for years as separate processes and there are some 3000 published articles relating to their potential use in therapy (53). PDT is a licenced treatment in 19 countries and offered through the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. Both PDT and SDT have been used in the treatment of cancer, with variable success (54). PDT on its own is used for more superficial cancer types such as prostate, breast and skin cancer, but when combined with SDT, it has been shown to be efficient for deep-seated tumors such as bowel and ovarian cancer, as well as metastatic cancer, in particular when spread to bone, lung and liver tissues (55). The vast majority of patients with advanced cancer treated with sono-PDT live longer than predicted and in 75% of cases, there is significant tumor cell destruction (56). Sono-PDT is available as an effective treatment for cancer in England, Mexico, Israel, China and in Cape Town. At the beginning of the treatment, patients consume or are intravenously given a chlorophyll-based light-sensitive compound which binds selectively to tumor cells. It stays absorbed by cancer cells but is quickly released by healthy cells. The active agent is absorbed into the body 48-72 h prior to treatment and intravenous ozone is administered just before the treatment to enhance its effects; ozone, which is a super-oxygen compound, inhibits cancer cell growth, as cancer cells are more active under low oxygen thresholds. The patient is then placed in a specialized light bed and exposed to thousands of light emitting diodes (LED) which emit red and infrared light waves, followed by ultrasound treatment at a definite frequency in tumor-localized areas of the body. The excited sensitizer stimulates the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) from the molecular oxygen present in the cells. ROS lead the cancer cell to its death by severely increasing the level of oxidative stress, causing genetic and cell membrane damage. The death of cancer cells activates the immune system that responds to the call to clean-up the debris and attacks the remaining malignant cells that are finally recognized as invaders. Sono-PDT also blocks angiogenesis, the crucial conduit for cancer cell nutrition. Since the whole body is exposed to the light, all cancer or pre-cancerous cells within a range are affected, allowing the destruction and inhibition of cancer anywhere in the body (15, 57, 58). This treatment is entirely safe and the only side-effects are related to the destruction of the tumor cells that produce an inflammatory response intended at clearing the dead tumor tissue (59).

Sensitizers

Sensitizers are the key factors for PDT and SDT. The synergistic effects of sensitizer and low-power ultrasound has been examined in many in vitro studies and to a lesser extent in in vivo models (60). Sensitizer distribution and uptake in cells is potentially important for the therapeutic effect, because of the very short lifetime and very short diffusion distance of some radical products derived from the sensitizer produced during the procedure (61). Different sensitizers may have different mechanisms of action. Healthy cells have an aerobic mechanism. Cancer cells have an anaerobic metabolism and produce lactate. The sensitizer molecule with its positive charge binds to negatively-charged lactate in the cancer cell. It is less tightly held by healthy cells. Light or sound activation increases the energy level of the sensitizer, producing an activated molecule. This is turn reacts with nearby oxygen to form free radical oxygen. This is a super powerful oxidant, that it is relatively unstable and reacts with nearby oxidizable material, the organic matter in the cancer cell. This breaks down the organic matter, destroying the cell structure, and killing or damaging the cell. Free radical oxygen has a very small radius of action, so it only damages the cancer cells (62). At present, several experimental and clinical studies have provided convincing evidence that derivatives of chlorophyll a, in particular chlorin e6, are very promising compounds for PDT as far as they are characterized by high photodynamic activity and low frequency of known adverse reactions. One of the most promising chlorin e6-based photosensitizers officially approved for clinical use is Photolon® [also known as Fotolon® or chlorin e6–polymer polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) complex]. Photodynamic sensitizers have also been studied for ultrasound-activated properties. They have the benefit of being non-toxic unless activated and have been demonstrated to have a tumor-localizing properties (63, 64). Hematoporphyrin, a frequently used photo-sensitizer improved the killing of mouse sarcoma and rat ascites 130 tumor cells exposed in vitro to ultrasound (1.92 MHz) at intensities of 1.27 and 3.18 W/cm2, from 30% and 50% to 99% to 95%, respectively (65).

Chlorine e6. Chlorin e6 is a naturally-occurring chlorin derivative that has shown promise as a cancer therapeutic (66). Chlorin e6 is a second-generation photosensitizer with a high quantum yield of singlet oxygen of 0.65 at pH 7-8 (67). The chlorin e6 molecule has been adapted to improve its clinical efficacy, and has lesser side-effects compared to first-generation photosensitizers from hematoporphyrin derivatives (68). In addition, the amphiphilic structure of a chlorin e6 molecule allows for easy penetration through the cell membrane, thus ensuring accumulation inside cells (27, 69). Combination of ultrasound (1.6 W/cm2) with chlorin e6 (SDT) hampered tumor growth significantly (p<0.05) in SPCA-1 human lung adenocarcinoma cells and mice bearing SPCA-1 tumor xenograft. Flow cytometric analysis showed that chlorin e6-mediated sonodynamic effect occurred mainly through the induction of cell necrosis (70). Antitumor effect and possible mechanisms of chlorin e6-mediated sono-PDT on murine 4T1 mammary cancer cells in vitro have suggested an enhanced therapeutic effect compared to each monotherapy. Caspase-dependent apoptosis, loss of matrix metalloproteinase, and generation of ROS are supposedly involved in the process (71).

Photolon. Photolon™/Fotolon™ is a water-soluble photo-sensitizer; the conjugation of chlorin e6 to hydrophilic PVP making Photolon hydrophilic in nature (72-75). While lipophilic photosensitizers (e.g. lipophilic porphyrins) are preferentially taken up through the plasma membrane of the cell, hydrophilic photosensitizers tend to be taken up by pinocytosis (76), a form of endocytosis, where particles are taken in by the cell in endosomal vesicles which subsequently fuse with lysosomes (i.e. lysosomotropic delivery) to exert its effects (75). Photolon addition to the cell suspension resulted in a significant enhancement of ultrasound cytotoxicity at 0.4 and 0.7 W/cm2 intensity, with Light Intensity (LI50) decreasing to 0.33 W/cm2. The differences in cell number after exposure to ultrasound alone and ultrasound with Photolon were statistically significant (p<0.01). Thus, the gain in ultrasound cytotoxicity in the presence of Photolon was 1.5-fold (77). Combination treatment using photolon, including SDT and PDT, enhanced the effect on the glial tumor model in rat brain. The combination treatment significantly (by 25-30%) increased necrosis areas in tumor tissues compared with each of the components taken separately (78).

Sonoflora 1. Chlorophyll is a group of fat-soluble magnesium–porphyrin complexes widely found in green plants. It has good biomolecular affinity and is also a kind of broad-spectrum tumor inhibitor. As an efficient light-absorbing substance, its derivatives have been used as photosensitizers in PDT. This indicates that they may also be promising sonosensitizers. They are quickly absorbed by all cells upon oral administration. Within 24 hours, normal cells expel such agents, but they remain in cancer cells. When sound and light frequencies are pulsed through the body, they cause photosynthesis, which releases free radical oxygen directly into the cancer cells and kills them. Tumors shrink by up to 30% in the first 14 days of treatment (79). Sonoflora 1 is an analog of chlorophyll, in that its macrocycle backbone is porphyrin-based and the center of the porphyrin ring consists of a metal ion (80). The chlorophyll derivative has light absorption peaks at 402 and 636 nm (81). A very unusual combination of this investigational agent and various prototype light sources and ultrasound devices was used in the treatment of three patients who suffered from late-stage breast cancer with systemic metastases to multiple organs. All patients had significant partial or complete responses, thus proving sono-PDT to be a promising new therapeutic combination for the treatment of breast cancer (82).

Sonnelux-1. Sonnelux-1 is a metallo–chlorin complex, containing a highly purified mixture of a number of chlorophyllins, each with a different side chain and an average molecular weight of 942. Sonnelux-1 has photo-activation properties and has also been demonstrated to be extremely sensitive to ultrasound (83). Sonnelux-1 has shown significant tumor cell cytotoxicity following ultrasound activation using a mouse S-180 sarcoma model (84). Tumor-growth inhibition was observed in the group that was administered both ultrasound and Sonnelux-1, with significant reduction in mean tumor weight. Activated cancer therapy using Sonnelux-1 shows prominence over a period of time. Activated cancer therapy using Sonnelux-1 was a well-tolerated non-invasive treatment even in advanced metastatic cancer and was a well-tolerated non-invasive treatment even in advanced metastatic cancer. No adverse events have been reported following administration of Sonnelux-1 (85).

Light and Sound Sources for SPDT

The range of wavelengths of sound and light used in PDT and SDT are specific to the sensitizer–they need to be in the range that can cause the activation of the sensitizer. While light, by nature, is not penetrative; the water in the body can be used as a carrier to transmit sound deep into the body. As a result, the combination of light and sound allows us to target tumors at various depths in the body (86). Light source and light delivery are two of the primary aspects in PDT. The choice of light source for PDT can be determined by the location of the tumor, by the light dose applied and by the choice of photosensitizer (87). Lasers and lamps have both been employed to perform PDT and the advantage of one source over the other has not been demonstrated, hence the use of lasers or lamps depends on the particular application. Conventionally, red laser light with 630-nm wavelength has been proposed to activate Photofrin because of the increased tissue penetration of light at longer wavelengths. Red laser light is commonly produced by using an argon ion or KTP/YAG laser beam that is converted by a dye module to 630 nm. This conversion is inherently costly and not effective, but allows for light delivery with fiber optics. For non-fiber optic application of light, other light sources could potentially be useful alternatives (88). Although PDT has been traditionally performed using lasers, the availability of broad-band sources (lamps) is challenging the use of lasers where light can be delivered directly to the tumor (skin, oral cavity, etc.) without the need to combine the source with an optical fiber. A pulsed LED light source is both easy to use, as well as many times more penetrative than a regular light source of the same wavelength (89).

Ultrasound energy has been widely investigated and used over the past three decades in a broad range of clinical procedures (90). Sonication with high-intensity focused ultrasound is an effective local cancer treatment that induces cytotoxicity through thermal effects, and non-thermal cavitation which generates intracellular ROS (62, 91, 92). Ultrasonically-induced cavitation is the major cause of sonoluminesence and sonochemical reactions (93) and, if it can be controlled, may have maximum potential for therapeutic applications among the non-thermal effects of ultrasound. The non-thermal nonolytic efficiency of a given low-level of ultrasound exposure has been correlated with the generation of acoustic cavitation (94, 95). Ultrasonically-induced cavitation, defined as generation and oscillation of gas bubbles, may cause permanent cell damage and modify the membrane structure and functional properties of the cells to induce cell killing by cell lysis, necrosis or apoptosis (96-98). SDT is an efficient local cancer treatment that induces cytotoxicity through thermal effects and non-thermal cavitation which generates intracellular ROS causing oxidative damage to a variety of cellular targets and subsequent tumor necrosis. Studies of the in vivo effects of ultrasound in animal brains have shown both thermal and cavitation mechanisms that depend on the applied intensity, ultrasound frequency and period of exposure. The effects of cavitation strongly depend on the tissue type and location. Furthermore, hemorrhage and blood vessel damage could occur when cavitation is present (99, 100). When high frequency sound waves are concentrated on body tissues, those tissues heat-up and die. To use this as a cancer treatment, the specialist targets the area containing the cancer. High-intensity focused ultrasound can be a successful treatment for prostate cancer. Recently, magnetic resonance imaging- or ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound has been developed, not only for prostate cancer but also for liver cancer (101).

Summary

Targeted cancer therapy is directed against cancer-specific molecules and signaling pathways and thus has more limited non-specific toxicities. PDT and SDT have been used in the treatment of cancer with variable success. Sono-PDT is a late-model and promising anticancer therapy using the combination of SDT and PDT. The efficacy of cell damage induced by chlorin e6-, Photolon-, Sonoflora-1- and Sonnelux-1-mediated combination therapy of SDT and PDT has rarely been reported. Developing advanced sensitizer materials which are suitable for SPDT therapy can improve the range of cancer treatment methodologies.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean goverment (MESI) (NRF-2012R1A2A1A03670430).

  • Received April 25, 2014.
  • Revision received July 1, 2014.
  • Accepted July 2, 2014.
  • Copyright© 2014 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. John G. Delinassios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Levitzki A,
    2. Klein S
    : Signal transduction therapy of cancer. Mol Aspects Med of medicine 31: 287-329, 2010.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Mohan C
    : Signal Transduction: A Short Overview of its Role in Health and Disease, Second edition. EMD Biosciences: 2010. San Diego, CA, United States.
  3. ↵
    1. Alberts B BD,
    2. Lewis J,
    3. Raff M,
    4. Roberts K,
    5. Watson J D
    : Transport from the Plasma Membrane via Endosomes: Endocytosis. Molecular Biology of the Cell Third edition.1994. Garland Publishing, New York and London.
  4. ↵
    1. Levitzki A
    : Signal-transduction therapy. A novel approach to disease management. Eur J Biochem 226: 1-13, 1994.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Klein S,
    2. Levitzki A
    : Targeted cancer therapy: promise and reality. Adv Cancer Res 97: 295-319, 2007.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Bononi A,
    2. Agnoletto C,
    3. De Marchi E,
    4. Marchi S,
    5. Patergnani S,
    6. Bonora M,
    7. Giorgi C,
    8. Missiroli S,
    9. Poletti F,
    10. Rimessi A,
    11. Pinton P
    : Protein kinases and phosphatases in the control of cell fate. Enzyme Res 2011: 329098, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Augstenca CH M,
    2. Peña C,
    3. Östman A
    : A digest on the role of the tumor microenvironment in gastrointestinal Cancers. Cancer Microenviron 3: 167-176, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Pietras K,
    2. Rubin K,
    3. Sjoblom T,
    4. Buchdunger E,
    5. Sjoquist M,
    6. Heldin CH,
    7. Ostman A
    : Inhibition of PDGF receptor signaling in tumor stroma enhances antitumor effect of chemotherapy. Cancer Res 62: 5476-5484, 2002.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    Clinical Considerations for Therapeutic Cancer Vaccines, Guidance for Industry: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, October 2011, Rockville, MD, USA.
  10. ↵
    1. Arora A,
    2. Scholar EM
    : Role of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in cancer therapy. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 315: 971-979, 2005.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Krohner KM,
    2. Spitak AF
    : Cancer nursing education in the community hospital: principles and practice. Oncol Nurs Forum 19: 783-786, 1992.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Postiglione I,
    2. Chiaviello A,
    3. Palumbo G
    : Enhancing photodynamyc therapy efficacy by combination therapy: dated, current and oncoming strategies. Cancers 3: 2597-2629, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Jaracz S,
    2. Chen J,
    3. Kuznetsova LV,
    4. Ojima I
    : Recent advances in tumor-targeting anticancer drug conjugates. Bioorg Med Chem 13: 5043-5054, 2005.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Ocana A,
    2. Pandiella A,
    3. Siu LL,
    4. Tannock IF
    : Preclinical development of molecular-targeted agents for cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 8: 200-209, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Dolmans DE,
    2. Fukumura D,
    3. Jain RK
    : Photodynamic therapy for cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 3: 380-387, 2003.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Wilson BC
    : Photodynamic therapy for cancer: principles. Can J Gastroenterol 16: 393-396, 2002.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Vrouenraets MB,
    2. Visser GW,
    3. Snow GB,
    4. van Dongen GA
    : Basic principles, applications in oncology and improved selectivity of photodynamic therapy. Anticancer Res 23: 505-522, 2003.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Dougherty TJ,
    2. Gomer CJ,
    3. Henderson BW,
    4. Jori G,
    5. Kessel D,
    6. Korbelik M,
    7. Moan J,
    8. Peng Q
    : Photodynamic therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 90: 889-905, 1998.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    1. Gudgin Dickson EF,
    2. Goyan RL,
    3. Pottier RH
    : New directions in photodynamic therapy. Cell Mol Biol 48: 939-954, 2002.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Rosenthal I,
    2. Sostaric JZ,
    3. Riesz P
    : Sonodynamic therapy – a review of the synergistic effects of drugs and ultrasound. Ultrason Sonochem 11: 349-363, 2004.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Abulafi AM,
    2. Williams NS
    : Photodynamic therapy for cancer. Br Med J 304: 589-590, 1992.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    1. Agostinis P,
    2. Berg K,
    3. Cengel KA,
    4. Foster TH,
    5. Girotti AW,
    6. Gollnick SO,
    7. Hahn SM,
    8. Hamblin MR,
    9. Juzeniene A,
    10. Kessel D,
    11. Korbelik M,
    12. Moan J,
    13. Mroz P,
    14. Nowis D,
    15. Piette J,
    16. Wilson BC,
    17. Golab J
    : Photodynamic therapy of cancer: an update. CA Cancer J Clin 61: 250-281, 2011.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Berg H
    : Photodynamic tumour therapy and cancer multistep therapy. J Photochem Photobiol B, Biol 2: 404-406, 1988.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Berg K,
    2. Madslien K,
    3. Bommer JC,
    4. Oftebro R,
    5. Winkelman JW,
    6. Moan J
    : Light induced relocalization of sulfonated meso-tetraphenylporphines in NHIK 3025 cells and effects of dose fractionation. Photochem and photobiol 53: 203-210, 1991.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Delaney TF,
    2. Glatstein E
    : Photodynamic therapy of cancer. Compr Ther 14: 43-55, 1988.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Musser DA,
    2. Wagner JM,
    3. Weber FJ,
    4. Datta-Gupta N
    : The binding of tumor localizing porphyrins to a fibrin matrix and their effects following photoirradiation. Res Commun Chem Pathol Pharmacol 28: 505-525, 1980.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Cunderlikova B,
    2. Gangeskar L,
    3. Moan J
    : Acid-base properties of chlorin e6: relation to cellular uptake. J Photochem Photobiol B, Biol 53: 81-90, 1999.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Zhao X,
    2. Li H,
    3. Lee RJ
    : Targeted drug delivery via folate receptors. Expet Opin Drug Deliv 5: 309-319, 2008.
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. Sheleg EAZ SV,
    2. Khodina TV,
    3. Kochubeev GA,
    4. Istomin YP,
    5. Chalov VN,
    6. Zhuravkin IN
    : Photodynamic therapy with chlorin e6 for skin metastases of melanoma. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 20: 21-26, 2004.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Yumita N,
    2. Umemura S
    : Sonodynamic antitumour effect of chloroaluminum phthalocyanine tetrasulfonate on murine solid tumour. J phar pharmacol 56: 85-90, 2004.
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Lovell JF,
    2. Liu TW,
    3. Chen J,
    4. Zheng G
    : Activatable photosensitizers for imaging and therapy. Chem Rev 110: 2839-2857, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Celli JP,
    2. Spring BQ,
    3. Rizvi I,
    4. Evans CL,
    5. Samkoe KS,
    6. Verma S,
    7. Pogue BW,
    8. Hasan T
    : Imaging and photodynamic therapy: mechanisms, monitoring, and optimization. Chem Rev 110: 2795-2838, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Umemura S KK,
    2. Sasaki K,
    3. Yumita N,
    4. Umemura K,
    5. Nishigaki R
    : Recent advances in sonodynamic approach to cancer therapy. Ultrason Sonochem 3: S187-S191, 1996.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Kinoshita M,
    2. Hynynen K
    : Mechanism of porphyrin-induced sonodynamic effect: possible role of hyperthermia. Radiat Res 165: 299-306, 2006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Huang D,
    2. Okada K,
    3. Komori C,
    4. Itoi E,
    5. Kawamura K,
    6. Suzuki T
    : Ultrastructure of sarcoma 180 cells after ultrasound irradiation in the presence of sparfloxacin. Anticancer Res 24: 1553-1559, 2004.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Apkarian VA
    : Chemistry. A pixellated window on chemistry in solids. Science 313: 1747-1748, 2006.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. ↵
    1. Yumita N,
    2. Han QS,
    3. Kitazumi I,
    4. Umemura S
    : Sonodynamically-induced apoptosis, necrosis, and active oxygen generation by mono-l-aspartyl chlorin e6. Cancer sci 99: 166-172, 2008.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Jensen JA
    : A model for the propagation and scattering of ultrasound in tissue. J Acoust Soc Am 89: 182-190, 1991.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Ziskin MC
    : Fundamental physics of ultrasound and its propagation in tissue. Radiographics: a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc 13: 705-709, 1993.
    OpenUrl
  35. ↵
    1. Kondo T,
    2. Kano E
    : Effect of free radicals induced by ultrasonic cavitation on cell killing. Int J Radiat Biol 54: 475-486, 1988.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Kondo T US,
    2. Tanabe K
    : Novel therapeutic applications of ultrasound: utilization of thermal and cavitational effects. Jpn J Hyperther Oncol 16: 203-216, 2000.
    OpenUrl
  36. ↵
    1. Loreto B FL,
    2. Kondo T
    : Biological effects of low intensity ultrasound: The mechanism involved, and its implications on therapy and on biosafety of ultrasound. J Radiat Res 45: 479-489, 2004.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    1. Capella MA,
    2. Capella LS
    : A light in multidrug resistance: photodynamic treatment of multidrug-resistant tumors. J Biomed Sci 10: 361-366, 2003.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Kondo K,
    2. Miyoshi T,
    3. Takizawa H,
    4. Kenzaki K,
    5. Sakiyama S,
    6. Tangoku A
    : Photodynamic therapy for submucosal tumor of the central bronchus. The journal of medical investigation: J Med invest 52: 208-211, 2005.
    OpenUrl
  39. ↵
    1. Foroulis CN,
    2. Thorpe JA
    : Photodynamic therapy (PDT) in Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia or early cancer. E Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 29: 30-34, 2006.
    OpenUrl
  40. ↵
    1. Umemura S,
    2. Yumita N,
    3. Nishigaki R
    : Enhancement of ultrasonically induced cell damage by a gallium-porphyrin complex, ATX-70. Jpn J Cancer Res: Gann 84: 582-588, 1993.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  41. ↵
    1. W. Wang JZ,
    2. Liu W,
    3. Bai L,
    4. Gai H,
    5. Ye L,
    6. Tan Y,
    7. Yang T
    : Treatment of unrecetable nodular hepatocellular carcinoma with high-intensity focused ultrasound combined transarterial oily chemoembolization: preliminary clinical outcomes. In: Second International Symposium on Therapeutic Ultrasound. Seatle, Washington, USA, pp. 11-12.
  42. ↵
    1. CB Jin FW,
    2. Wang ZB,
    3. Chen WZ
    : High intensity focused ultrasound therapy in combination with transcatheyer arterial chemoembolism for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a primary clinical study 2nd international Symposim on Therapeutic Ultrasound. In: Second International Symposim on Therapeutic Ultrasound. Seatle, Washington, USA, pp. 44-45.
  43. ↵
    1. Lejbkowicz F,
    2. Salzberg S
    : Distinct sensitivity of normal and malignant cells to ultrasound in vitro. Environ Health Persp 105(Suppl 6): 1575-1578, 1997.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. Lejbkowicz F,
    2. Zwiran M,
    3. Salzberg S
    : The response of normal and malignant cells to ultrasound in vitro. Ultrasound Med Biol 19: 75-82, 1993.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Jin ZH,
    2. Miyoshi N,
    3. Ishiguro K,
    4. Umemura S,
    5. Kawabata K,
    6. Yumita N,
    7. Sakata I,
    8. Takaoka K,
    9. Udagawa T,
    10. Nakajima S,
    11. Tajiri H,
    12. Ueda K,
    13. Fukuda M,
    14. Kumakiri M
    : Combination effect of photodynamic and sonodynamic therapy on experimental skin squamous cell carcinoma in C3H/HeN mice. J Dermatol 27: 294-306, 2000.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  46. ↵
    1. Julian N,
    2. Richard JF,
    3. Thomas JL
    : Activated cancer therapy using light and ultrasound – a case series of sonodynamic photodynamic therapy in 115 patients over a 4 year period. Curr Drug Ther: 179-193, 2009.
  47. ↵
    1. Julian NK,
    2. Richard JF
    : Outcome measures following sonodynamic photodynamic therapy. Curr Drug Ther: 12-16, 2011.
  48. ↵
    1. Su X,
    2. Li L,
    3. Wang P
    : Research progress of the anti-tumor effect of sonodynamic and photodynamic therapy. J Biomed Eng 29: 583-587, 2012.
    OpenUrl
  49. ↵
    1. Moghissi K,
    2. Dixon K
    : Photodynamic therapy (PDT) in esophageal cancer: a surgical view of its indications based on 14 years's experience. Technol Cancer Res T 2: 319-326, 2003.
    OpenUrl
  50. ↵
    1. McCaughan CR B,
    2. Fowley C,
    3. Nomikou N,
    4. McHale AP,
    5. McCarron PA,
    6. Callan JF
    : Enhanced ROS production and cell death through comibined photo-and-sono-activation of conventional photosensitizing drugs. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 21: 5750-5752, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  51. ↵
    1. Schumacker PT
    : Reactive oxygen species in cancer cells: live by the sword, die by the sword. Cancer cell 10: 175-176, 2006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. ↵
    1. Huang Z
    : A review of progress in clinical photodynamic therapy. Technol Cancer Res T 4: 283-293, 2005.
    OpenUrl
  53. ↵
    1. Yamaguchi S,
    2. Kobayashi H,
    3. Narita T,
    4. Kanehira K,
    5. Sonezaki S,
    6. Kudo N,
    7. Kubota Y,
    8. Terasaka S,
    9. Houkin K
    : Sonodynamic therapy using water-dispersed TiO2-polyethylene glycol compound on glioma cells: comparison of cytotoxic mechanism with photodynamic therapy. Ultrason Sonochem 18: 1197-1204, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Dougherty TJ
    : Photodynamic therapy. Photochem Photobiol 58: 895-900, 1993.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. ↵
    1. Bellnier DA,
    2. Ho YK,
    3. Pandey RK,
    4. Missert JR,
    5. Dougherty TJ
    : Distribution and elimination of Photofrin II in mice. Photochem Photobiol 50: 221-228, 1989.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  56. ↵
    1. Umemura S,
    2. Yumita N,
    3. Nishigaki R,
    4. Umemura K
    : Mechanism of cell damage by ultrasound in combination with hematoporphyrin. Jpn J Cancer Res Gann 81: 962-966, 1990.
    OpenUrl
  57. ↵
    1. Palumbo G
    : Photodynamic therapy and cancer: a brief sightseeing tour. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 4: 131-148, 2007.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  58. ↵
    1. Roberts WG,
    2. Hasan T
    : Tumor-secreted vascular permeability factor/vascular endothelial growth factor influences photosensitizer uptake. Cancer Res 53: 153-157, 1993.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  59. ↵
    1. Yumita N,
    2. Nishigaki R,
    3. Umemura K,
    4. Umemura S
    : Hematoporphyrin as a sensitizer of cell-damaging effect of ultrasound. Jpn J Cancer Res: Gann 80: 219-222, 1989.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  60. ↵
    1. Kostenich GA,
    2. Zhuravkin IN,
    3. Zhavrid EA
    : Experimental grounds for using chlorin e6 in the photodynamic therapy of malignant tumors. J photochem photobiol B, Biol 22: 211-217, 1994.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  61. ↵
    1. Kasuya K,
    2. Shimazu M,
    3. Suzuki M,
    4. Kuroiwa Y,
    5. Usuda J,
    6. Itoi T,
    7. Tsuchida A,
    8. Aoki T
    : Novel photodynamic therapy against biliary tract carcinoma using mono-L: -aspartyl chlorine e6: basic evaluation for its feasibility and efficacy. J Hepatobiliary Pancr sci 17: 313-321, 2010.
    OpenUrl
  62. ↵
    1. Ali-Seyed M,
    2. Bhuvaneswari R,
    3. Soo KC,
    4. Olivo M
    : Photolon – photosensitization induces apoptosis via ROS-mediated cross-talk between mitochondria and lysosomes. Int J Oncol 39: 821-831, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  63. ↵
    1. Kessel D,
    2. Poretz RD
    : Sites of photodamage induced by photodynamic therapy with a chlorin e6 triacetoxymethyl ester (CAME). Photochem Photobiol 71: 94-96, 2000.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  64. ↵
    1. Chen B,
    2. Zheng R,
    3. Liu D,
    4. Li B,
    5. Lin J,
    6. Zhang W
    : The tumor affinity of chlorin e6 and its sonodynamic effects on non-small cell lung cancer. Ultrason Sonochem 20: 667-673, 2013.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  65. ↵
    1. Li Q,
    2. Wang X,
    3. Wang P,
    4. Zhang K,
    5. Wang H,
    6. Feng X,
    7. Liu Q
    : Efficacy of chlorin e6-mediated sono-photodynamic therapy on 4T1 cells. Cancer Biother Radio 29: 42-52, 2014.
    OpenUrl
  66. ↵
    1. Lukyanov AN,
    2. Torchilin VP
    : Micelles from lipid derivatives of water-soluble polymers as delivery systems for poorly soluble drugs. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 56: 1273-1289, 2004.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Kaneda Y,
    2. Tsutsumi Y,
    3. Yoshioka Y,
    4. Kamada H,
    5. Yamamoto Y,
    6. Kodaira H,
    7. Tsunoda S,
    8. Okamoto T,
    9. Mukai Y,
    10. Shibata H,
    11. Nakagawa S,
    12. Mayumi T
    : The use of PVP as a polymeric carrier to improve the plasma half-life of drugs. Biomaterials 25: 3259-3266, 2004.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Isakau HA,
    2. Parkhats MV,
    3. Knyukshto VN,
    4. Dzhagarov BM,
    5. Petrov EP,
    6. Petrov PT
    : Toward understanding the high PDT efficacy of chlorin e6-polyvinylpyrrolidone formulations: photophysical and molecular aspects of photosensitizer-polymer interaction in vitro. J photochem Photobiol B Biol 92: 165-174, 2008.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  67. ↵
    1. Shliakhtsin SV,
    2. Trukhachova TV,
    3. Isakau HA,
    4. Istomin YP
    : Pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of Photolon (Fotolon) in intact and tumor-bearing rats. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther 6: 97-104, 2009.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  68. ↵
    1. Calzavara-Pinton PG,
    2. Venturini M,
    3. Sala R
    : Photodynamic therapy: update 2006. Part 1: Photochemistry and photobiology. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 21: 293-302, 2007.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  69. ↵
    1. Tserkovsky DA,
    2. Alexandrova EN,
    3. Istomin YP
    : Photolon enhancement of ultrasound cytotoxicity. Exper Oncol 33: 107-109, 2011.
    OpenUrl
  70. ↵
    1. Tserkovsky DA,
    2. Alexandrova EN,
    3. Chalau VN,
    4. Istomin YP
    : Effects of combined sonodynamic and photodynamic therapies with photolon on a glioma C6 tumor model. Exper Oncol 34: 332-335, 2012.
    OpenUrl
  71. ↵
    Squamous cell cancer responds to SPDT therapy, January 5, 2012. PRNewswire, Sarasota, florida, USA.
  72. ↵
    1. Lewis TJ
    : Toxicity and cytopathogenic properties toward human melanoma cells of activated cancer therapeutics in zebra fish. Integr Cancer Ther 9: 84-92, 2010.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  73. ↵
    1. Wang X,
    2. Zhang W,
    3. Xu Z,
    4. Luo Y,
    5. Mitchell D,
    6. Moss RW
    : Sonodynamic and photodynamic therapy in advanced breast carcinoma: a report of three cases. Integr Cancer Ther 8: 283-287, 2009.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  74. ↵
    1. Huang Z,
    2. Moseley H,
    3. Bown S
    : Rationale of combined PDT and SDT modalities for treating cancer patients in terminal stage: the proper use of photosensitizer. Integr Cancer Ther 9: 317-319; discussion 320-311, 2010.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  75. ↵
    1. Wang P,
    2. Wang XB,
    3. Liu QH,
    4. Tang W,
    5. Li T
    : Enhancement of ultrasonically induced cytotoxic effect by hematoporphyrin in vitro. Chemotherapy 54: 364-371, 2008.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  76. ↵
    1. Xiaohuai W,
    2. Lewis TJ,
    3. Mitchell D
    : The tumoricidal effect of sonodynamic therapy (SDT) on S-180 sarcoma in mice. Integr Cancer Ther 7: 96-102, 2008.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. ↵
    1. Shibaguchi H,
    2. Tsuru H,
    3. Kuroki M,
    4. Kuroki M
    : Sonodynamic cancer therapy: a non-invasive and repeatable approach using low-intensity ultrasound with a sonosensitizer. Anticancer Res 31: 2425-2429, 2011.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  78. ↵
    1. Prakash Rai SM
    : Development and Applications of Photo-triggered Theranostic Agents. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2010: 1094-1124, 2010.
    OpenUrl
  79. ↵
    1. Zheng Huang HX,
    2. Yang K
    : Chen: Photodynamic therapy for treatment of solid tumors – potential and technical challenges. Technol Cancer Res T 7: 309-320, 2008.
    OpenUrl
  80. ↵
    1. Schmidt MH,
    2. Bajic DM,
    3. Reichert KW 2nd.,
    4. Martin TS,
    5. Meyer GA,
    6. Whelan HT
    : Light-emitting diodes as a light source for intraoperative photodynamic therapy. Neurosurgery 38: 552-556; discussion 556-557, 1996.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  81. ↵
    1. Brancaleon L,
    2. Moseley H
    : Laser and non-laser light sources for photodynamic therapy. Lasers Med Sci 17: 173-186, 2002.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  82. ↵
    1. Yu T
    : A review of research into the uses of low level ultrasound in cancer therapy. Ultrason Sonochem 11: 95-103, 2004.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. ↵
    1. Suzuki N,
    2. Okada K,
    3. Chida S,
    4. Komori C,
    5. Shimada Y,
    6. Suzuki T
    : Antitumor effect of acridine orange under ultrasonic irradiation in vitro. Anticancer Res 27: 4179-4184, 2007.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  84. ↵
    1. Ashush H,
    2. Rozenszajn LA,
    3. Blass M,
    4. Barda-Saad M,
    5. Azimov D,
    6. Radnay J,
    7. Zipori D,
    8. Rosenschein U
    : Apoptosis induction of human myeloid leukemic cells by ultrasound exposure. Cancer Res 60: 1014-1020, 2000.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  85. ↵
    1. Robinson TC,
    2. Lele PP
    : An analysis of lesion development in the brain and in plastics by high-intensity focused ultrasound at low-megahertz frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 51: 1333-1351, 1972.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  86. ↵
    1. Carstensen EL,
    2. Kelly P,
    3. Church CC,
    4. Brayman AA,
    5. Child SZ,
    6. Raeman CH,
    7. Schery L
    : Lysis of erythrocytes by exposure to CW ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol 19: 147-165, 1993.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  87. ↵
    1. Honda H,
    2. Zhao QL,
    3. Kondo T
    : Effects of dissolved gases and an echo contrast agent on apoptosis induced by ultrasound and its mechanism via the mitochondria-caspase pathway. Ultrasound Med Biol 28: 673-682, 2002.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  88. ↵
    1. Feril LB Jr..,
    2. Kondo T,
    3. Zhao QL,
    4. Ogawa R,
    5. Tachibana K,
    6. Kudo N,
    7. Fujimoto S,
    8. Nakamura S
    : Enhancement of ultrasound-induced apoptosis and cell lysis by echo-contrast agents. Ultrasound Med Biol 29: 331-337, 2003.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Miller MW,
    2. Miller DL,
    3. Brayman AA
    : A review of in vitro bioeffects of inertial ultrasonic cavitation from a mechanistic perspective. Ultrasound Med Biol 22: 1131-1154, 1996.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  89. ↵
    1. Feigl T,
    2. Volklein B,
    3. Iro H,
    4. Ell C,
    5. Schneider T
    : Biophysical effects of high-energy pulsed ultrasound on human cells. Ultrasound Med Biol 22: 1267-1275, 1996.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  90. ↵
    1. Fry FJ,
    2. Goss SA,
    3. Patrick JT
    : Transkull focal lesions in cat brain produced by ultrasound. J Neurosurg 54: 659-663, 1981.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  91. ↵
    1. Lele PP
    : Advanced ultrasonic techniques for local tumor hyperthermia. Radiol Clin North Am 27: 559-575, 1989.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  92. ↵
    1. Lynn JG
    : Histology of cerebral lesions produced by focused ultrasound. Am J Pathol 20: 637-694, 1944.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 34 (9)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 34, Issue 9
September 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Sono-Photodynamic Combination Therapy: A Review on Sensitizers
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
6 + 12 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Sono-Photodynamic Combination Therapy: A Review on Sensitizers
KRISHNA CHAITANYA SADANALA, PANKAJ KUMAR CHATURVEDI, YOU MI SEO, JEUNG MO KIM, YONG SAM JO, YANG KOO LEE, WOONG SHICK AHN
Anticancer Research Sep 2014, 34 (9) 4657-4664;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Sono-Photodynamic Combination Therapy: A Review on Sensitizers
KRISHNA CHAITANYA SADANALA, PANKAJ KUMAR CHATURVEDI, YOU MI SEO, JEUNG MO KIM, YONG SAM JO, YANG KOO LEE, WOONG SHICK AHN
Anticancer Research Sep 2014, 34 (9) 4657-4664;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • PDT
    • SDT
    • PDT and SDT: Comparison
    • Sono-PDT
    • Sensitizers
    • Light and Sound Sources for SPDT
    • Summary
    • Acknowledgements
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Recent advances of sonodynamic therapy in cancer treatment
  • New photosensitizers for photodynamic therapy
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Cytokine-based Cancer Immunotherapy: Challenges and Opportunities for IL-10
  • Proteolytic Enzyme Therapy in Complementary Oncology: A Systematic Review
  • Multimodal Treatment of Primary Advanced Ovarian Cancer
Show more Reviews

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • photodynamic therapy
  • sonodynamic therapy
  • sensitizer
  • sono-photodynamic therapy
  • review
Anticancer Research

© 2023 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire