Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Dec 26;27(1):306.
doi: 10.1186/s40001-022-00942-2.

Does particle radiation have superior radiobiological advantages for prostate cancer cells? A systematic review of in vitro studies

Tian-Qi Du #  1   2 , Ruifeng Liu #  1   3   4 , Qiuning Zhang  5   6   7 , Hongtao Luo  1   3   4 , Yanliang Chen  1   2 , Mingyu Tan  1   2 , Qian Wang  1   2 , Xun Wu  1   2 , Zhiqiang Liu  1   3   4 , Shilong Sun  1   3   4 , Kehu Yang  8 , Jinhui Tian  8 , Xiaohu Wang  9   10   11   12
Affiliations

Does particle radiation have superior radiobiological advantages for prostate cancer cells? A systematic review of in vitro studies

Tian-Qi Du et al. Eur J Med Res. .

Abstract

Background: Charged particle beams from protons to carbon ions provide many significant physical benefits in radiation therapy. However, preclinical studies of charged particle therapy for prostate cancer are extremely limited. The aim of this study was to comprehensively investigate the biological effects of charged particles on prostate cancer from the perspective of in vitro studies.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review by searching EMBASE (OVID), Medline (OVID), and Web of Science databases to identify the publications assessing the radiobiological effects of charged particle irradiation on prostate cancer cells. The data of relative biological effectiveness (RBE), surviving fraction (SF), standard enhancement ratio (SER) and oxygen enhancement ratio (OER) were extracted.

Results: We found 12 studies met the eligible criteria. The relative biological effectiveness values of proton and carbon ion irradiation ranged from 0.94 to 1.52, and 1.67 to 3.7, respectively. Surviving fraction of 2 Gy were 0.17 ± 0.12, 0.55 ± 0.20 and 0.53 ± 0.16 in carbon ion, proton, and photon irradiation, respectively. PNKP inhibitor and gold nanoparticles were favorable sensitizing agents, while it was presented poorer performance in GANT61. The oxygen enhancement ratio values of photon and carbon ion irradiation were 2.32 ± 0.04, and 1.77 ± 0.13, respectively. Charged particle irradiation induced more G0-/G1- or G2-/M-phase arrest, more expression of γ-H2AX, more apoptosis, and lower motility and/or migration ability than photon irradiation.

Conclusions: Both carbon ion and proton irradiation have advantages over photon irradiation in radiobiological effects on prostate cancer cell lines. Carbon ion irradiation seems to have further advantages over proton irradiation.

Keywords: Charged particle irradiation; In vitro; Prostate cancer; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose regarding this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram of the systematic review. PRISMA Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Results of the risk of bias assessment
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
RBE, average LET, initial energy, particle type and cell line of the included studies. RBE relative biological effectiveness, LET linear energy transfer
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
SF values of prostate cancer cells irradiated by carbon ion, proton and photon. SF surviving fraction
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
SER values of combination therapy and OER. SER standard enhancement ratio, OER oxygen enhancement ratio
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Corkum M, Loblaw A, Hasan Y, Chung HT, Tseng CL, McGuffin M, et al. Prostate high dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer: late toxicity and patient reported outcomes from a randomized phase II clinical trial. Radiother Oncol. 2021;156:160–165. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.12.021. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Leite E, Ramos C, Ribeiro V, Salvajoli BP, Nahas WC, Salvajoli JV, et al. Hypofractionated radiation therapy to the prostate bed with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): a phase 2 trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2021;109(5):1263–1270. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.12.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Murray J, Griffin C, Gulliford S, Syndikus I, Staffurth J, Panades M, et al. A randomised assessment of image guided radiotherapy within a phase 3 trial of conventional or hypofractionated high dose intensity modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2020;142:62–71. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.10.017. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bai M, Gergelis KR, Sir M, Whitaker TJ, Routman DM, Stish BJ, et al. Comparing bowel and urinary domains of patient-reported quality of life at the end of and 3 months post radiotherapy between intensity-modulated radiotherapy and proton beam therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Cancer Med. 2020;9(21):7925–7934. doi: 10.1002/cam4.3414. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types