No abstract

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are aggressive tumors with a poor prognosis. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-1 inhibitors (PARPi) enhance the cytotoxic effects of radiation. In this study, we evaluated the effect of PARPi on survival and DNA damage of irradiated STS cells. For clonogenic assays, STS cell lines were irradiated with or without olaparib, iniparib or veliparib pretreatment. The effect of PARP inhibition on γ-H2AX and Rad51 foci formation, on PARP-1, phospho-ERK and cleaved caspase-3 protein expression and on cell cycle progression was evaluated on irradiated rhabdomyosarcoma cells pretreated with olaparib. The results from this work showed that PARPi induced significant radiosensitization in STS cells. Rhabdomyosarcoma cells showed the highest increase in radiosensitivity, with a radiosensitization enhancement ratio at 50% survival (ER50) of 3.41 with veliparib. All PARPi exerted a synergistic effect when combined with radiation. Fibrosarcoma cells showed an ER50 of 2.29 with olaparib. Leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma cells showed their highest ER50 with veliparib (1.71 and 1.84, respectively). In rhabdomyosarcoma, olaparib enhanced the formation of radiation-induced γ-H2AX/Rad51 foci and PARP-1 cleavage, induced slightly increased expression of cleaved caspase-3 and reduced phospho-ERK expression. Moreover, the combination of olaparib and radiation resulted in a significantly enhanced cell cycle arrest in the G/M phase compared to the two treatments alone. In conclusion, we have shown that PARPi are potent radiosensitizers of human STS cells. These results support the pursuit of further investigations into the effects of PARPi combined with radiation on STS.

No abstract

Background and purpose COVID-19 constitutes a worldwide threat, prompting Italian Government to implement specific measures on March 8, 2020, to protect patients and health workers from disease transmission. The impact of preventive measures on daily activity of a radiotherapy facility may hamper the ability to fulfill normal workload burden. Thus, we assessed the number of delivered treatments in a specific observation period after the adoption of preventive measures (since March 11 to April 24, 2020) and compared it with the corresponding period of the year 2019. Materials and methods Overall number of delivered fractions was related to actual time of platform daily activity and reported as a ratio between number of delivered fractions and activity hours (Fr/Hrs). Fr/Hrs were calculated and compared for two different periods of time, March 11–April 24, 2019 (Fr/Hrs1), and March 11–April 24, 2020 (Fr/Hrs2). Results Fr/Hrs1 and Fr/Hrs2 were 2.66 and 2.54 for year 2019 and 2020, respectively, for a Fr/Hrsratio of 1.07 (95% CI 1.03–1.12, p = 0.0005). Fr/Hrs1 was significantly higher than Fr/Hrs2 for SliR and PreciseR, with Fr/Hrsratio of 1.92 (95% CI 1.66–2.23, p < 0.0001) and 1.11 (95% CI 1.03–1.2, p = 0.003), respectively. No significant difference was reported for SynergyR and CyberknifeR with Fr/Hrsratio of 0.99 (95% CI 0.91–1.08, p = 0.8) and 0.9 (95% CI 0.77–1.06, p = 0.2), respectively. Fr/Hrs1 was significantly lower than Fr/Hrs2 for TomotherapyR, with Fr/Hrsratio of 0.88 (95% CI 0.8–0.96, p = 0.007). Conclusion Preventive measures did not influence workload burden performed. Automation in treatment delivery seems to compensate effectively for health workers number reduction.