Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Science 12 December 2003:
Vol. 302. no. 5652, p. 1894
DOI: 10.1126/science.1089517
Prev | Table of Contents | Next

Technical Comments

Comment on "Tumor Response to Radiotherapy Regulated by Endothelial Cell Apoptosis" (II)

Decades of careful experimentation have established that the intrinsic radiosensitivity of tumor cells is a major determinant of the radiation response of tumors, with modifying contributions of extrinsic factors such as the tumor microenvironment and host immune response. The publication by Garcia-Barros et al. (1) proposes a new paradigm in which host endothelial cell killing by radiation is the major factor determining tumor response at doses comparable to those used in radiotherapy.

To claim such an extraordinary shift in paradigm places a burden to provide extraordinary evidence. However, we believe that the data provided by Garcia-Barros et al. (1) fall short of that standard. Of concern is the fact that the tumors used in this study grew unexpectedly slowly in the wild-type littermates of the acid sphingomyelinase (asmase) knockout mice. This raises the possibility that the tumor–host relationship may be unusual in this system. Innate-immune mechanisms, acquired-immune mechanisms, or both may be operating that cause tumor cell death and predispose the endothelial cells to apoptosis, which may not occur with nonimmunogenic tumors growing in syngeneic or autologous conditions. This view is supported by the finding that 50% of asmase+/+ mice were cured of 100 to 150 mm3 MCA/129 tumors by the unusually low radiation dose of 15 grays (Gy) [50% tumor control (TCD50)]. Typical TCD50 values for similar-sized tumors exceed 30Gy, with immunogenic tumors showing greater sensitivity (2). If host infiltrating cells were exceptionally active in the tumor–host combination used in this study, as we suspect, the results would be biased in favor of finding a difference between the asmase–/– and asmase+/+ mice, because the ceramide pathway is known to be important in tumor necrosis factor–{alpha} (TNF-{alpha}) and interferon-{gamma} (IFN-{gamma}) signaling, cytokines that would be expected to be involved in mediating the observed effects.

In light of these concerns, it would be premature to declare a paradigm shift in our understanding of radiation therapy. Although the Garcia-Barros et al. study (1) is important and provocative, further work with other systems is needed to determine the contribution of endothelial cell response to the therapy of human tumors.

Martin Brown
Department of Radiation Oncology
Stanford University
Stanford CA 94305, USA

Robert Bristow
Department of Radiation Oncology
Princess Margaret Hospital
Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada

Peter Glazer
Department of Therapeutic
Radiology/Genetics
Yale University
New Haven, CT 06536, USA

Richard Hill
Department of Research
Ontario Cancer Institute/PMH
Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada

William McBride
Department of Experimental Radiation
Oncology
University of California
Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA

Gillies McKenna
Department of Radiation Oncology
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA

Ruth Muschel
Department of Pathology
University of Pennsylvania


References

Received for publication 17 June 2003. Accepted for publication 30 October 2003.

To Advertise     Find Products

ADVERTISEMENT

Featured Jobs

Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)