Tatiana N. Demidova

Mechanisms in photodynamic therapy: part one—photosensitizers, photochemistry and cellular localization

The use of non-toxic dyes or photosensitizers (PS) in combination with harmless visible light that is known as photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been known for over a hundred years, but is only now becoming widely used. Originally developed as a tumor therapy, some of its most successful applications are for non-malignant disease. In a series of three reviews we will discuss the mechanisms that operate in the field of PDT. Part one discusses the recent explosion in discovery and chemical synthesis of new PS. Some guidelines on how to choose an ideal PS for a particular application are presented. The photochemistry and photophysics of PS and the two pathways known as Type I (radicals and reactive oxygen species) and Type II (singlet oxygen) photochemical processes are discussed. To carry out PDT effectively in vivo, it is necessary to ensure sufficient light reaches all the diseased tissue. This involves understanding how light travels within various tissues and the relative effects of absorption and scattering. The fact that most of the PS are also fluorescent allows various optical imaging and monitoring strategies to be combined with PDT. The most important factor governing the outcome of PDT is how the PS interacts with cells in the target tissue or tumor, and the key aspect of this interaction is the subcellular localization of the PS. Examples of PS that localize in mitochondria, lysosomes, endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi apparatus and plasma membranes are given. Finally the use of 5-aminolevulinic acid as a natural precursor of the heme biosynthetic pathway, stimulates accumulation of the PS protoporphyrin IX is described.

Mechanisms in photodynamic therapy: part two-cellular signaling, cell metabolism and modes of cell death.

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been known for over a hundred years, but is only now becoming widely used. Originally developed as a tumor therapy, some of its most successful applications are for non-malignant disease. In the second of a series of three reviews, we will discuss the mechanisms that operate in PDT on a cellular level. In Part I [Castano AP, Demidova TN, Hamblin MR. Mechanism in photodynamic therapy: part one-photosensitizers, photochemistry and cellular localization. Photodiagn Photodyn Ther 2004;1:279-93] it was shown that one of the most important factors governing the outcome of PDT, is how the photosensitizer (PS) interacts with cells in the target tissue or tumor, and the key aspect of this interaction is the subcellular localization of the PS. PS can localize in mitochondria, lysosomes, endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi apparatus and plasma membranes. An explosion of investigation and explorations in the field of cell biology have elucidated many of the pathways that mammalian cells undergo when PS are delivered in tissue culture and subsequently illuminated. There is an acute stress response leading to changes in calcium and lipid metabolism and production of cytokines and stress proteins. Enzymes particularly, protein kinases, are activated and transcription factors are expressed. Many of the cellular responses are centered on mitochondria. These effects frequently lead to induction of apoptosis either by the mitochondrial pathway involving caspases and release of cytochrome c, or by pathways involving ceramide or death receptors. However, under certain circumstances cells subjected to PDT die by necrosis. Although there have been many reports of DNA damage caused by PDT, this is not thought to be an important cell-death pathway. This mechanistic research is expected to lead to optimization of PDT as a tumor treatment, and to rational selection of combination therapies that include PDT as a component.

Effect of Cell-Photosensitizer Binding and Cell Density on Microbial Photoinactivation

ABSTRACT Photodynamic therapy involves the use of nontoxic dyes called photosensitizers and visible light to produce reactive oxygen species and cell killing. It is being studied as an alternative method of killing pathogens in localized infections due to the increasing problem of multiantibiotic resistance. Although much has been learned about the mechanisms of microbial killing, there is still uncertainty about whether dyes must bind to and penetrate various classes of microbe in order to produce effective killing after illumination. In this report, we compare the interactions of three antimicrobial photosensitizers: rose bengal (RB), toluidine blue O (TBO), and a poly-l-lysine chlorin(e6) conjugate (pL-ce6) with representative members of three classes of pathogens; Escherichia coli (gram-negative bacteria), Staphylococcus aureus (gram-positive bacteria), Candida albicans (yeast). We compared fluence-dependent cell survival after illumination with the appropriate wavelengths of light before and after extracellular dye had been washed out and used three 10-fold dilutions of cell concentration. pL-ce6 was overall the most powerful photosensitizer, was equally effective with and without washing, and showed a strong dependence on cell concentration. TBO was less effective in all cases after washing, and the dependence on cell concentration was less pronounced. RB was ineffective after washing (except for S. aureus) but still showed a dependence on cell concentration. The overall order of susceptibility was S. aureus > E. coli > C. albicans, but C. albicans cells were 10 to 50 times bigger than the bacteria. We conclude that the number and mass of the cells compete both for available dye binding and for extracellularly generated reactive oxygen species.

Mechanisms in photodynamic therapy: Part three—Photosensitizer pharmacokinetics, biodistribution, tumor localization and modes of tumor destruction

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been known for over a hundred years, but is only now becoming widely used. Originally developed as cancer therapy, some of its most successful applications are for non-malignant disease. The majority of mechanistic research into PDT, however, is still directed towards anti-cancer applications. In the final part of series of three reviews, we will cover the possible reasons for the well-known tumor localizing properties of photosensitizers (PS). When PS are injected into the bloodstream they bind to various serum proteins and this can affect their phamacokinetics and biodistribution. Different PS can have very different pharmacokinetics and this can directly affect the illumination parameters. Intravenously injected PS undergo a transition from being bound to serum proteins, then bound to endothelial cells, then bound to the adventitia of the vessels, then bound either to the extracellular matrix or to the cells within the tumor, and finally to being cleared from the tumor by lymphatics or blood vessels, and excreted either by the kidneys or the liver. The effect of PDT on the tumor largely depends at which stage of this continuous process light is delivered. The anti-tumor effects of PDT are divided into three main mechanisms. Powerful anti-vascular effects can lead to thrombosis and hemorrhage in tumor blood vessels that subsequently lead to tumor death via deprivation of oxygen and nutrients. Direct tumor cell death by apoptosis or necrosis can occur if the PS has been allowed to be taken up by tumor cells. Finally the acute inflammation and release of cytokines and stress response proteins induced in the tumor by PDT can lead to an influx of leukocytes that can both contribute to tumor destruction as well as to stimulate the immune system to recognize and destroy tumor cells even at distant locations.

Photodynamic therapy targeted to pathogens.

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) employs a non-toxic dye termed a photosensitizer (PS) together with low intensity visible light, which, in the presence of oxygen, produce cytotoxic species. PS can be targeted to its destination cell or tissue and, in addition, the irradiation can be spatially confined to the lesion giving PDT the advantage of dual selectivity. This promising approach can be used for various applications including microbial inactivation and the treatment of infections. Resistance to PDT has not been shown and multiantibiotic-resistant strains are as easily killed as naïve strains. It is known that Gram (+) bacteria are more sensitive to PDT as compared to Gram (-) species. However, the use of cationic PS or agents that increase the permeability of the outer membrane allows for the effective killing of Gram (-) organisms. Some PS have an innate positive charge, but our approach is to link PS to a cationic molecular vehicle such as poly-L-lysine. This modification dramatically increases PS binding to and penetrating through the negatively charged bacterial permeability barrier. Due to focused light delivery the use of PDT is possible only for localized infections. Nonetheless numerous diseases can be treated. Selectivity of the PS for microbes over host cells, accurate delivery of the PS into the infected area, and PDT dose adjustment help minimize side effects and give PDT an advantage over conventional therapy. There are only a few reports about the use of antimicrobial PDT in animal models and clinical trials. We have used genetically modified bioluminescent bacteria to follow the effect of PDT in infected wounds, burns, and soft tissue infections in mice. Not only were bacteria infecting wounds, burns, and abscesses killed, but mice were saved from death due to sepsis and wound healing was improved.

Protease-Stable Polycationic Photosensitizer Conjugates between Polyethyleneimine and Chlorin(e6) for Broad-Spectrum Antimicrobial Photoinactivation

ABSTRACT We previously showed that covalent conjugates between poly-l-lysine and chlorin(e6) were efficient photosensitizers (PS) of both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. The polycationic molecular constructs increased binding and penetration of the PS into impermeable gram-negative cells. We have now prepared a novel set of second-generation polycationic conjugates between chlorin(e6) and three molecular forms of polyethyleneimine (PEI): a small linear, a small cross-linked, and a large cross-linked molecule. The conjugates were characterized by high-pressure liquid chromatography and tested for their ability to kill a panel of pathogenic microorganisms, the gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes, the gram-negative Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and the yeast Candida albicans, after exposure to low levels of red light. The large cross-linked molecule efficiently killed all organisms, while the linear conjugate killed gram-positive bacteria and C. albicans. The small cross-linked conjugate was the least efficient antimicrobial PS and its remarkably low activity could not be explained by reduced photochemical quantum yield or reduced cellular uptake. In contrast to polylysine conjugates, the PEI conjugates were resistant to degradation by proteases such as trypsin that hydrolyze lysine-lysine peptide bonds, The advantage of protease stability combined with the ready availability of PEI suggests these molecules may be superior to polylysine-PS conjugates for photodynamic therapy of localized infections.

Photodynamic inactivation of Bacillus spores, mediated by phenothiazinium dyes.

ABSTRACT Spore formation is a sophisticated mechanism by which some bacteria survive conditions of stress and starvation by producing a multilayered protective capsule enclosing their condensed DNA. Spores are highly resistant to damage by heat, radiation, and commonly employed antibacterial agents. Previously, spores have also been shown to be resistant to photodynamic inactivation using dyes and light that easily destroy the corresponding vegetative bacteria. We have discovered that Bacillus spores are susceptible to photoinactivation by phenothiazinium dyes and low doses of red light. Dimethylmethylene blue, methylene blue, new methylene blue, and toluidine blue O are all effective, while alternative photosensitizers such as Rose Bengal, polylysine chlorin(e6) conjugate, a tricationic porphyrin, and a benzoporphyrin derivative, which easily kill vegetative cells, are ineffective. Spores of Bacillus cereus and B. thuringiensis are most susceptible, B. subtilis and B. atrophaeus are also killed, and B. megaterium is resistant. Photoinactivation is most effective when excess dye is washed from the spores, showing that the dye binds to the spores and that excess dye in solution can quench light delivery. The relatively mild conditions needed for spore killing could have applications for treating wounds contaminated by anthrax spores, for which conventional sporicides would have unacceptable tissue toxicity.

MECHANISMS OF LOW LEVEL LIGHT THERAPY

The use of low levels of visible or near infrared light for reducing pain, inflammation and edema, promoting healing of wounds, deeper tissues and nerves, and preventing tissue damage has been known for almost forty years since the invention of lasers. Originally thought to be a peculiar property of laser light (soft or cold lasers), the subject has now broadened to include photobiomodulation and photobiostimulation using non-coherent light. Despite many reports of positive findings from experiments conducted in vitro, in animal models and in randomized controlled clinical trials, LLLT remains controversial. This likely is due to two main reasons; firstly the biochemical mechanisms underlying the positive effects are incompletely understood, and secondly the complexity of rationally choosing amongst a large number of illumination parameters such as wavelength, fluence, power density, pulse structure and treatment timing has led to the publication of a number of negative studies as well as many positive ones. In particular a biphasic dose response has been frequently observed where low levels of light have a much better effect than higher levels. This introductory review will cover some of the proposed cellular chromophores responsible for the effect of visible light on mammalian cells, including cytochrome c oxidase (with absorption peaks in the near infrared) and photoactive porphyrins. Mitochondria are thought to be a likely site for the initial effects of light, leading to increased ATP production, modulation of reactive oxygen species and induction of transcription factors. These effects in turn lead to increased cell proliferation and migration (particularly by fibroblasts), modulation in levels of cytokines, growth factors and inflammatory mediators, and increased tissue oxygenation. The results of these biochemical and cellular changes in animals and patients include such benefits as increased healing in chronic wounds, improvements in sports injuries and carpal tunnel syndrome, pain reduction in arthritis and neuropathies, and amelioration of damage after heart attacks, stroke, nerve injury and retinal toxicity.

MACROPHAGE-TARGETED PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) uses light activatable molecules that after illumination produce reactive oxygen species and unwanted tissue destruction. PDT has dual selectivity due to control of light delivery and to some extent selective photosensitizer (PS) accumulation in tumors or other diseased tissue, additional targeted selectivity of PS for disease is necessary. The delivery of drugs to selected lesions can be enhanced by the preparation of targeted macromolecular conjugates that employ cell type specific targeting by ligand-receptor recognition. Macrophages and monocytes express a scavenger-receptor that is a high-capacity route for delivering molecules into endocytic compartments in a cell-type specific manner. We have shown that by attaching PS to scavenger-receptor ligands it is possible to get three logs of selective cell killing in macrophages while leaving non-macrophage cells unharmed. The capability to selectively kill macrophages has applications in treating cancer and in the detection and therapy of vulnerable atherosclerotic plaque and possibly for autoimmune disease and some infections.

Anthrax surrogate spores are destroyed by PDT mediated by phenothiazinium dyes

Some Gram-positive bacteria (including the causative agent of anthrax - Bacillus anthracis) survive conditions of stress and starvation by producing dormant stage spores. The spore’s multilayered capsule consists of inner and outer membranes, cortex, proteinaceous spore coat, and in some species an exosporium. These outer layers enclose dehydrated and condensed DNA, saturated with small, acid-soluble proteins. These protective structures make spores highly resistant to damage by heat, radiation, and commonly employed anti-bacterial agents. Previously Bacillus spores have been shown to be resistant to photodynamic inactivation (PDI) using dyes and light that easily destroy the corresponding vegetative bacteria, but recently we have discovered that they are susceptible to PDI. Photoinactivation, however, is only possible if phenothiazinium dyes are used. Dimethylmethylene blue, methylene blue, new methylene blue and toluidine blue O are all effective photosensitizers. Alternative photosensitizers such as Rose Bengal, polylysine chlorin(e6) conjugate, a tricationic porphyrin and benzoporphyrin derivative are ineffective against spores even though they can easily kill vegetative cells. Spores of B. cereus and B. thuringiensis are most susceptible, B. subtilis and B. atrophaeus are also killed, while B. megaterium is resistant. Photoinactivation is most effective when excess dye is washed from the spores showing that the dye binds to the spores and that excess dye in solution can quench light delivery. The relatively mild conditions needed for spore killing could have applications for treating wounds contaminated by anthrax spores and for which conventional sporicides would have unacceptable tissue toxicity.