In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 18, No. 10 ( 2023-10-10), p. e0292492-
Abstract:
Volatile and intravenous anesthetics may worsen oncologic outcomes in basic science animal models. These effects may be related to suppressed innate and adaptive immunity, decreased immunosurveillance, and disrupted cellular signaling. We hypothesized that anesthetics would promote lung tumor growth via altered immune function in a murine model and tested this using an immunological control group of immunodeficient mice. Methods Lewis lung carcinoma cells were injected via tail vein into C57BL/6 immunocompetent and NSG immunodeficient mice during exposure to isoflurane and ketamine versus controls without anesthesia. Mice were imaged on days 0, 3, 10, and 14 post-tumor cell injection. On day 14, mice were euthanized and organs fixed for metastasis quantification and immunohistochemistry staining. We compared growth of tumors measured from bioluminescent imaging and tumor metastasis in ex vivo bioluminescent imaging of lung and liver. Results Metastases were significantly greater for immunocompromised NSG mice than immunocompetent C57BL/6 mice over the 14-day experiment (partial η 2 = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.54, 0.76). Among immunocompetent mice, metastases were greatest for mice receiving ketamine, intermediate for those receiving isoflurane, and least for control mice (partial η 2 = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.82, 0.91). In immunocompetent mice, significantly decreased T lymphocyte (partial η 2 = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.29, 0.93) and monocyte (partial η 2 = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.52, 0.96) infiltration was observed in anesthetic-treated mice versus controls. Conclusions The immune system appears central to the pro-metastatic effects of isoflurane and ketamine in a murine model, with decreased T lymphocytes and monocytes likely playing a role.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g008
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.g009
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.t001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.t002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.t003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.s001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.s002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.s003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.s004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.r001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.r002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.r003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.r004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0292492.r005
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2023
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3
Permalink