4.6 Article

Optimization of the classical oral cancerization protocol in hamster to study oral cancer therapy

Journal

ORAL DISEASES
Volume 26, Issue 6, Pages 1175-1184

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/odi.13358

Keywords

animal welfare; boron neutron capture therapy; carcinogenesis; hamster cheek pouch; mucositis; oral cancer

Funding

  1. Instituto Nacional del Cancer, Argentina [INC 35-2015]
  2. University of Missouri Institute for Nano-and Molecular Medicine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective(s) The hamster carcinogenesis model recapitulates oral oncogenesis. Dimethylbenz[a]anthracene (DMBA) cancerization induces early severe mucositis, affecting animal's welfare and causing tissue loss and pouch shortening. Short pouches cannot be everted for local irradiation for boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT). Our aim was to optimize the DMBA classical cancerization protocol to avoid severe mucositis, without affecting tumor development. We evaluated BNCT in animals cancerized with this novel protocol. Materials and methods We studied: Classical cancerization protocol (24 applications) and Classical with two interruptions (completed at the end of the cancerization protocol). BNCT mediated by boronophenylalanine (BPA) was performed in both groups. Results The twice-interrupted group exhibited a significantly lower percentage of animals with severe mucositis versus the non-interrupted group (17% versus 71%) and a significantly higher incidence of long pouches (100% versus 53%). Tumor development and the histologic characteristics of tumor and precancerous tissue were not affected by the interruptions. For both groups, overall tumor response was more than 80%, with a similar incidence of BNCT-induced severe mucositis. Conclusion(s) The twice-interrupted protocol reduced severe mucositis during cancerization without affecting tumor development. This favored the animal's welfare and reduced the number of animals to be cancerized for our studies, without affecting BNCT response.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available