[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Indexing Sources::
Guide for Authors::
Online Submission::
Ethics::
Articles archive::
For Reviewers::
Contact us::
::
Basic and Clinical Biochemistry and Nutrition
..
DOAJ
..
CINAHL
..
EBSCO
..
IMEMR
..
ISC
..
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
enamad
..
:: Volume 23, Issue 4 (Bimonthly 2019) ::
Feyz 2019, 23(4): 344-351 Back to browse issues page
Investigation of the expression of P53 gene in bystander cells after therapeutic ultrasound exposure
Masumeh Rezaei , Roghayeh Kamran-Samani , Ahmad Shanei , Mohammad Kazemi , Seyed Hossein Hejazi
Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, I.R. Iran. , a.shanei1397@gmail.com
Abstract:   (2392 Views)
Background: Bystander effect is defined as biological responses observed in cells that are not exposed to radiation directly but these radiation effects are induced through messages from irradiated cells. One of the non-invasive methods for cancer treatment is ultrasound waves. The therapeutic efficacy of ultrasound waveslike treatment with ionizing radiation can be altered by the bystander effect, so it is necessary to evaluate the bystander effect after ultrasound exposure. In this study, the effect of ultrasound exposure on the expression of P53 gene in neighboring cells has been investigated.
Materials and Methods: The cells were divided into three groups: control (without treatment), target (under direct ultrasound exposure) and the bystander (no radiation, only receiving target cells culture media). In the target group, the cells were exposed to the ultrasound and after one hour their culture medium were transferred to the bystander group. Cell viability and the expression of P53 gene by using the MTT assay and Real-time PCR was analyzed.
Results: The percentage of cell survival in the target group was reduced compared to the control group, but in the bystander group, this difference was not significant. The expression of P53 gene in the bystander group was statistically increased compared to the control group.
Conclusion: The bystander effect is induced after ultrasound exposure and it can increase the level of P53 gene expression in bystander cells.
Keywords: Ultrasound waves, Bystander effect, MTT assay, Real-time PCR, P53 gene
Full-Text [PDF 344 kb]   (1026 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: medicine, paraclinic
Received: 2019/01/10 | Revised: 2019/10/8 | Accepted: 2019/06/1 | Published: 2019/09/30
References
1. Calatayud MP, Asin L, Tres A, Goya GF, Ibarra MR. Cell bystander effect induced by radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and magnetic nanoparticles. Curr Nanosci 2016; 12(3): 372-7.
2. Boyd M, Ross SC, Dorrens J, Fullerton NE, Tan KW, Zalutsky MR, et al. Radiation-induced biologic bystander effect elicited in vitro by targeted radiopharmaceuticals labeled with a-, b-, and Auger electron–emitting radionuclides. J Nucl Med 2006; 47(6): 1007-15.
3. Burdak-Rothkamm S, Rothkamm K. Radiation-induced bystander and systemic effects serve as a unifying model system for genotoxic stress responses. Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res 2018; 42(5): 221-8.
4. Marin A, Martin M, Linan O, Alvarenga F, López M, Fernández L, et al. Bystander effects and radiotherapy. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2015; 20(1): 12-21.
5. Olsson MG, Nilsson EC, Rutardóttir S, Paczesny J, Pallon J, Akerstrom B. Bystander cell death and stress response is inhibited by the radical scavenger α1-microglobulin in irradiated cell cultures. Radiat Res 2010; 174(5): 590-600.
6. Bazak J, Fahey JM, Wawak K, Korytowski W, Girotti AW. Bystander effects of nitric oxide in anti-tumor photodynamic therapy. Cancer Cell Microenviron 2017; 4(1).
7. Chen Z, Xie MX, Wang XF, Lu Q. Different effects of therapeutic ultrasound parameters and culture conditions on gene transfection efficiency. Chinese. J Cancer Res 2008; 20(4): 249-54.
8. Miller DL, Smith NB, Bailey MR, Czarnota GJ, Hynynen K, Makin IRS, et al. Overview of therapeutic ultrasound applications and safety considerations. J Ultrasound Med 2012; 31(4): 623-34.
9. Sazgarnia A, Shanei A. Evaluation of acoustic cavitation in terephthalic acid solutions containing gold nanoparticles by the spectrofluorometry method. Int J Photoenergy 2012; 37(6): 105-10.
10. Kaufman GE. Mutagenicity of ultrasound in cultured mammalian cells. Ultrasound Med Biol 1985; 11(3): 497-501.
11. Hei TK. Cyclooxygenase‐2 as a signaling molecule in radiation‐induced bystander effect. Mol Carcinog 2006; 45(6): 455-60.
12. Han W, Chen S, Yu K, Wu L. Nitric oxide mediated DNA double strand breaks induced in proliferating bystander cells after α-particle irradiation. Mutat Res 2010; 684(1): 81-9.
13. Yakovlev VA. Role of nitric oxide in the radiation-induced bystander effect. Redox Biol 2015; 6: 396-400.
14. Yahyapour R, Motevaseli E, Rezaeyan A, Abdollahi H, Farhood B, Cheki M, et al. Mechanisms of Radiation Bystander and Non-Targeted Effects: Implications to Radiation Carcinogenesis and Radiotherapy. Curr Radiopharm 2018; 11(1): 34-45
15. Barati AH, Mokhtari -Dizaji M, Mozdarani H, Bathaei SZ, Hassan ZM. Free hydroxyl radical dosimetry by using 1 MHz low level ultrasound waves. Iran J Radiat Res 2006; 3(4): 163-9.
16. Furusawa Y, Hassan MA, Zhao QL, Ogawa R, Tabuchi Y, Kondo T. Effects of therapeutic ultrasound on the nucleus and genomic DNA. Ultrason Sonochem 2014; 21(6): 2061-8.
17. Velculescu VE, El-Deiry WS. Biological and clinical importance of the P53 tumor suppressor gene. Clin Chem 1996; 42(6): 858-68.
18. Souza RP, Bonfim-Mendonca PS, Ratti BA, Kaplum V, Bruschi ML, Nakamura CV, et al. Oxidative Stress Triggered by Apigenin Induces Apoptosis in a Comprehensive Panel of Human Cervical Cancer-Derived Cell Lines. Oxid Med Cell Longev 2017; 15(1): 18-25.
19. Hamada N, Matsumoto H, Hara T, Kobayashi Y. Intercellular and intracellular signaling pathways mediating ionizing radiation-induced bystander effects. J Radiat Res 2007; 48(2): 87-95.
20. Chaudhry MA. Bystander effect: biological endpoints and microarray analysis. Mutat Res 2006; 597(1): 98-112.
21. Koturbash I, Loree J, Kutanzi K, Koganow C, Pogribny I, Kovalchuk O. In vivo bystander effect: cranial X-irradiation leads to elevated DNA damage, altered cellular proliferation and apoptosis, and increased P53 levels in shielded spleen. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 70(2): 554-62.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Rezaei M, Kamran-Samani R, Shanei A, Kazemi M, Hejazi S H. Investigation of the expression of P53 gene in bystander cells after therapeutic ultrasound exposure. Feyz 2019; 23 (4) :344-351
URL: http://feyz.kaums.ac.ir/article-1-3785-en.html


Creative Commons License
This open access journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial ۴.۰ International License. CC BY-NC ۴. Design and publishing by Kashan University of Medical Sciences.
Copyright ۲۰۲۳© Feyz Medical Sciences Journal. All rights reserved.
Volume 23, Issue 4 (Bimonthly 2019) Back to browse issues page
مجله علوم پزشکی فیض Feyz Medical Sciences Journal
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 46 queries by YEKTAWEB 4645