Reoxygenation in a C3H Mouse Mammary Carcinoma the importance of chronic rather than acute hypoxia

Authors

  • Michael R. Horsman Danish Cancer Society, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus, Denmark
  • Cai Grau Danish Cancer Society, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus, Denmark
  • Jens Overgaard Danish Cancer Society, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus, Denmark

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3109/02841869509093983

Abstract

The role that chronic and acute hypoxia play in tumour reoxygenation after irradiation was investigated in a C3H mouse mammary carcinoma grown in the feet of female CDF1 mice. Tumours at 200 mm3 in size were locally irradiated with a priming dose of 20 Gy and then at various times after given a range of radiation doses under normal or clamped conditions. Local tumour control was determined 90 days later from which the tumour hypoxic fractions were calculated. Untreated tumours contained 23% hypoxic cells. Immediately after 20 Gy this increased to 52% and by 24 h had fallen to 10%. These reoxygenation experiments were repeated, giving either nicotinamide (1000 mg/kg; i.p. injected 30 min before each irradiation) to remove acute hypoxia, or carbogen breathing (for 5 min before and during irradiation) to decrease chronic hypoxia. With nicotinamide the normal hypoxic fraction was reduced to 7%, but after irradiation it had risen to 46% and by 24 h there was full reoxygenation with a value of 5% being observed. Carbogen breathing also decreased the normal hypoxic fraction to 6%, and immediately after irradiation this was increased to 38%. However, by 24 h it was still elevated at around 23%. These results suggest that chronic rather than acute hypoxia is necessary for reoxygenation in this tumour.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

1995-01-01

How to Cite

Horsman, M. R., Grau, C., & Overgaard, J. (1995). Reoxygenation in a C3H Mouse Mammary Carcinoma the importance of chronic rather than acute hypoxia. Acta Oncologica, 34(3), 325–328. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841869509093983