For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
59
views
23
references
 Top references
cited by
251
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      192
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Clinical trial of blood-brain barrier disruption by pulsed ultrasound.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The blood-brain barrier (BBB) limits the delivery of systemically administered drugs to the brain. Methods to circumvent the BBB have been developed, but none are used in standard clinical practice. The lack of adoption of existing methods is due to procedural invasiveness, serious adverse effects, and the complications associated with performing such techniques coincident with repeated drug administration, which is customary in chemotherapeutic protocols. Pulsed ultrasound, a method for disrupting the BBB, was shown to effectively increase drug concentrations and to slow tumor growth in preclinical studies. We now report the interim results of an ultrasound dose-escalating phase 1/2a clinical trial using an implantable ultrasound device system, SonoCloud, before treatment with carboplatin in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). The BBB of each patient was disrupted monthly using pulsed ultrasound in combination with systemically injected microbubbles. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) indicated that the BBB was disrupted at acoustic pressure levels up to 1.1 megapascals without detectable adverse effects on radiologic (MRI) or clinical examination. Our preliminary findings indicate that repeated opening of the BBB using our pulsed ultrasound system, in combination with systemic microbubble injection, is safe and well tolerated in patients with recurrent GBM and has the potential to optimize chemotherapy delivery in the brain.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Carboplatin dosage: prospective evaluation of a simple formula based on renal function.

          A H Calvert, D Newell, L. Gumbrell … (1989)
          A dosage formula has been derived from a retrospective analysis of carboplatin pharmacokinetics in 18 patients with pretreatment glomerular filtration rates (GFR) in the range of 33 to 136 mL/min. Carboplatin plasma clearance was linearly related to GFR (r = 0.85, P less than .00001) and rearrangements of the equation describing the correlation gave the dosage formula dose (mg) = target area under the free carboplatin plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) x (1.2 x GFR + 20). In a prospective clinical and pharmacokinetic study the formula was used to determine the dose required to treat 31 patients (GFR range, 33 to 135 mL/min) with 40 courses of carboplatin. The target AUC was escalated from 3 to 8 mg carboplatin/mL/min. Over this AUC range the formula accurately predicted the observed AUC (observed/predicted ratio 1.24 +/- 0.11, r = 0.886) and using these additional data, the formula was refined. Dose (mg) = target AUC x (GFR + 25) is now the recommended formula. AUC values of 4 to 6 and 6 to 8 mg/mL. min gave rise to manageable hematological toxicity in previously treated and untreated patients, respectively, and hence target AUC values of 5 and 7 mg/mL min are recommended for single-agent carboplatin in these patient groups. Pharmacokinetic modeling demonstrated that the formula was reasonably accurate regardless of whether a one- or two-compartment model most accurately described carboplatin pharmacokinetics, assuming that body size did not influence nonrenal clearance. The validity of this assumption was demonstrated in 13 patients where no correlation between surface area and nonrenal clearance was found (r = .31, P = .30). Therefore, the formula provides a simple and consistent method of determining carboplatin dose in adults. Since the measure of carboplatin exposure in the formula is AUC, and not toxicity, it will not be influenced by previous or concurrent myelosuppressive therapy or supportive measures. The formula is therefore applicable to combination and high-dose studies as well as conventional single-agent therapy, although the target AUC for carboplatin will need to be redefined for combination chemotherapy.
          Article 0 comments Cited 174 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Scanning ultrasound removes amyloid-β and restores memory in an Alzheimer's disease mouse model.

            Gerhard Leinenga, Jürgen Götz (2015)
            Amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide has been implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). We present a nonpharmacological approach for removing Aβ and restoring memory function in a mouse model of AD in which Aβ is deposited in the brain. We used repeated scanning ultrasound (SUS) treatments of the mouse brain to remove Aβ, without the need for any additional therapeutic agent such as anti-Aβ antibody. Spinning disk confocal microscopy and high-resolution three-dimensional reconstruction revealed extensive internalization of Aβ into the lysosomes of activated microglia in mouse brains subjected to SUS, with no concomitant increase observed in the number of microglia. Plaque burden was reduced in SUS-treated AD mice compared to sham-treated animals, and cleared plaques were observed in 75% of SUS-treated mice. Treated AD mice also displayed improved performance on three memory tasks: the Y-maze, the novel object recognition test, and the active place avoidance task. Our findings suggest that repeated SUS is useful for removing Aβ in the mouse brain without causing overt damage, and should be explored further as a noninvasive method with therapeutic potential in AD.
            Article 0 comments Cited 166 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Blood-brain barrier disruption with focused ultrasound enhances delivery of chemotherapeutic drugs for glioblastoma treatment.

              Yung-Pin Chen, Yi Hua, Tzu-Chen Yen … (2010)
              To demonstrate the feasibility of using focused ultrasound to enhance delivery of 1,3-bis(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea (BCNU) to glioblastomas in rats with induced tumors and determine if such an approach increases treatment efficacy. All animal experiments were approved by the animal committee and adhered to the experimental animal care guidelines. A 400-kHz focused ultrasound generator was used to transcranially disrupt the blood-brain barrier (BBB) in rat brains by delivering burst-tone ultrasound energy in the presence of microbubbles. The process was monitored in vivo by using magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. Cultured C6 glioma cells implanted in Sprague-Dawley rats were used as the tumor model. BCNU (13.5 mg/kg) was administered intravenously and its concentration in brains was quantified by using high-performance liquid chromatography. MR imaging was used to evaluate the effect of treatments longitudinally, including analysis of tumor progression and animal survival, and brain tissues were histologically examined. Methods including the two-tailed unpaired t test and the Mantel-Cox test were used for statistical analyses, with a significance level of .05. Focused ultrasound significantly enhanced the penetration of BCNU through the BBB in normal (by 340%) and tumor-implanted (by 202%) brains without causing hemorrhaging. Treatment of tumor-implanted rats with focused ultrasound alone had no beneficial effect on tumor progression or on animal survival up to 60 days. Administration of BCNU only transiently controlled tumor progression; nevertheless, relative to untreated controls, animal survival was improved by treatment with BCNU alone (increase in median survival time [IST(median)], 15.7%, P = .023). Treatment with focused ultrasound before BCNU administration controlled tumor progression (day 31: 0.05 cm(3) + or - 0.1 [standard deviation] vs 0.28 cm(3) + or - 0.1) and improved animal survival relative to untreated controls (IST(median), 85.9%, P = .0015). This study demonstrates a means of increasing localized chemotherapeutic drug delivery for brain tumor treatment and strongly supports the feasibility of this treatment in a clinical setting.
              Article 0 comments Cited 109 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Sci Transl Med
                Title: Science translational medicine
                Publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
                ISSN (Electronic): 1946-6242
                ISSN (Print): 1946-6234
                Publication date (Electronic): Jun 15 2016
                Volume: 8
                Issue: 343
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpitaux Universitaires La Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service de Neurochirurgie, F-75013 Paris, France. Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR S 1127, F-75013 Paris, France. alexandre.carpentier@aphp.fr.
                [2 ] CarThera, Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle épinière (ICM), Paris F-75013, France.
                [3 ] Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpitaux Universitaires La Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service de Neurochirurgie, F-75013 Paris, France. Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR S 1127, F-75013 Paris, France.
                [4 ] Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpitaux Universitaires La Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service de Neurochirurgie, F-75013 Paris, France.
                [5 ] AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires La Pitié-Salpêtrière-Charles Foix, Service de Neuroradiologie, F-75013 Paris, France.
                [6 ] INSERM, U1032, LabTau, Lyon F-69003, France.
                [7 ] Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR S 1127, F-75013 Paris, France. INSERM, U 1127, F-75013 Paris, France. CNRS, UMR 7225, F-75013, Paris, France. ICM, F-75013 Paris, France. AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires La Pitié-Salpêtrière-Charles Foix, Service de Neurologie 2-Mazarin, F-75013 Paris, France.
                Article
                Publisher Item ID: 8/343/343re2
                DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf6086
                PubMed ID: 27306666
                SO-VID: c033cb16-77c7-46ee-9a79-313abe1c9dec
                History

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content192

                See all similar

                Cited by250

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors361

                See all reference authors