Hubbry Logo
Photodynamic therapyPhotodynamic therapyMain
Open search
Photodynamic therapy
Community hub
Photodynamic therapy
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Photodynamic therapy
Photodynamic therapy
from Wikipedia

Photodynamic therapy
Light activation during photodynamic therapy targeting a tumor
Other namesPhotochemotherapy

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a form of phototherapy involving light and a photosensitizing chemical substance used in conjunction with molecular oxygen to elicit cell death (phototoxicity).[1]

PDT is used in treating acne, wet age-related macular degeneration, psoriasis, and herpes. It is used to treat malignant cancers,[2] including head and neck, lung, bladder and skin.

Advantages lessen the need for delicate surgery and lengthy recuperation and minimal formation of scar tissue and disfigurement. A side effect is the associated photosensitisation of skin tissue.[3]

Basics

[edit]

PDT applications involve three components:[2] a photosensitizer, a light source and tissue oxygen. The wavelength of the light source needs to be appropriate for exciting the photosensitizer to produce radicals and/or reactive oxygen species. These are free radicals (Type I) generated through electron abstraction or transfer from a substrate molecule and highly reactive state of oxygen known as singlet oxygen (Type II).

PDT is a multi-stage process. First a photosensitiser, ideally with negligible toxicity other than its phototoxicity, is administered in the absence of light, either systemically or topically. When a sufficient amount of photosensitiser appears in diseased tissue, the photosensitiser is activated by exposure to light for a specified period. The light dose supplies sufficient energy to stimulate the photosensitiser, but not enough to damage neighbouring healthy tissue. The reactive oxygen kills the target cells.[3]

Reactive oxygen species

[edit]

In air and tissue, molecular oxygen (O2) occurs in a triplet state, whereas almost all other molecules are in a singlet state. Reactions between triplet and singlet molecules are forbidden by quantum mechanics, making oxygen relatively non-reactive at physiological conditions. A photosensitizer is a chemical compound that can be promoted to an excited state upon absorption of light and undergo intersystem crossing (ISC) with oxygen to produce singlet oxygen. This species is highly cytotoxic, rapidly attacking any organic compounds it encounters. It is rapidly eliminated from cells, in an average of 3 μs.[4]

Photochemical processes

[edit]

When a photosensitiser is in its excited state (3Psen*) it can interact with molecular triplet oxygen (3O2) and produce radicals and reactive oxygen species (ROS), crucial to the Type II mechanism. These species include singlet oxygen (1O2), hydroxyl radicals (•OH) and superoxide (O2) ions. They can interact with cellular components including unsaturated lipids, amino acid residues and nucleic acids. If sufficient oxidative damage ensues, this will result in target-cell death (only within the illuminated area).[3]

Photochemical mechanisms

[edit]

When a chromophore molecule, such as a cyclic tetrapyrrolic molecule, absorbs a photon, one of its electrons is promoted into a higher-energy orbital, elevating the chromophore from the ground state (S0) into a short-lived, electronically excited state (Sn) composed of vibrational sub-levels (Sn′). The excited chromophore can lose energy by rapidly decaying through these sub-levels via internal conversion (IC) to populate the first excited singlet state (S1), before quickly relaxing back to the ground state.[3]

The decay from the excited singlet state (S1) to the ground state (S0) is via fluorescence (S1 → S0). Singlet state lifetimes of excited fluorophores are very short (τfl. = 10−9–10−6 seconds) since transitions between the same spin states (S → S or T → T) conserve the spin multiplicity of the electron and, according to the Spin Selection Rules, are therefore considered "allowed" transitions. Alternatively, an excited singlet state electron (S1) can undergo spin inversion and populate the lower-energy first excited triplet state (T1) via intersystem crossing (ISC); a spin-forbidden process, since the spin of the electron is no longer conserved. The excited electron can then undergo a second spin-forbidden inversion and depopulate the excited triplet state (T1) by decaying to the ground state (S0) via phosphorescence (T1→ S0). Owing to the spin-forbidden triplet to singlet transition, the lifetime of phosphorescence (τP = 10−3 − 1 second) is considerably longer than that of fluorescence.[3]

Photosensitisers and photochemistry

[edit]

Tetrapyrrolic photosensitisers in the excited singlet state (1Psen*, S>0) are relatively efficient at intersystem crossing and can consequently have a high triplet-state quantum yield. The longer lifetime of this species is sufficient to allow the excited triplet state photosensitiser to interact with surrounding bio-molecules, including cell membrane constituents.[3]

Photochemical reactions

[edit]

Excited triplet-state photosensitisers can react via Type-I and Type-II processes. Type-I processes can involve the excited singlet or triplet photosensitiser (1Psen*, S1; 3Psen*, T1), however due to the short lifetime of the excited singlet state, the photosensitiser can only react if it is intimately associated with a substrate. In both cases the interaction is with readily oxidisable or reducible substrates. Type-II processes involve the direct interaction of the excited triplet photosensitiser (3Psen*, T1) with molecular oxygen (3O2, 3Σg).[3]

Type-I processes

[edit]

Type-I processes can be divided into Type I(i) and Type I(ii). Type I (i) involves the transfer of an electron (oxidation) from a substrate molecule to the excited state photosensitiser (Psen*), generating a photosensitiser radical anion (Psen•) and a substrate radical cation (Subs•+). The majority of the radicals produced from Type-I(i) reactions react instantaneously with molecular oxygen (O2), generating a mixture of oxygen intermediates. For example, the photosensitiser radical anion can react instantaneously with molecular oxygen (3O2) to generate a superoxide radical anion (O2), which can go on to produce the highly reactive hydroxyl radical (OH•), initiating a cascade of cytotoxic free radicals; this process is common in the oxidative damage of fatty acids and other lipids.[3]

The Type-I process (ii) involves the transfer of a hydrogen atom (reduction) to the excited state photosensitiser (Psen*). This generates free radicals capable of rapidly reacting with molecular oxygen and creating a complex mixture of reactive oxygen intermediates, including reactive peroxides.[3]

Modified Jablonski diagram showing the mechanism of PDT[5]

Type-II processes

[edit]

Type-II processes involve the direct interaction of the excited triplet state photosensitiser (3Psen*) with ground state molecular oxygen (3O2, 3Σg); a spin allowed transition—the excited state photosensitiser and ground state molecular oxygen are of the same spin state (T).[3]

When the excited photosensitiser collides with molecular oxygen, a process of triplet-triplet annihilation takes place (3Psen* 1Psen and 3O2 1O2). This inverts the spin of one oxygen molecule's (3O2) outermost antibonding electrons, generating two forms of singlet oxygen (1Δg and 1Σg), while simultaneously depopulating the photosensitiser's excited triplet state (T1 → S0). The higher-energy singlet oxygen state (1Σg, 157kJ mol−1 > 3Σg) is very short-lived (1Σg ≤ 0.33 milliseconds (methanol), undetectable in H2O/D2O) and rapidly relaxes to the lower-energy excited state (1Δg, 94kJ mol−1 > 3Σg). It is, therefore, this lower-energy form of singlet oxygen (1Δg) that is implicated in cell injury and cell death.[3]

The highly-reactive singlet oxygen species (1O2) produced via the Type-II process act near to their site generation and within a radius of approximately 20 nm, with a typical lifetime of approximately 40 nanoseconds in biological systems.[3]

It is possible that (over a 6 μs period) singlet oxygen can diffuse up to approximately 300 nm in vivo. Singlet oxygen can theoretically only interact with proximal molecules and structures within this radius. ROS initiate reactions with many biomolecules, including amino acid residues in proteins, such as tryptophan; unsaturated lipids like cholesterol and nucleic acid bases, particularly guanosine and guanine derivatives, with the latter base more susceptible to ROS. These interactions cause damage and potential destruction to cellular membranes and enzyme deactivation, culminating in cell death.[3]

It is probable that in the presence of molecular oxygen and as a direct result of the photoirradiation of the photosensitiser molecule, both Type-I and II pathways play a pivotal role in disrupting cellular mechanisms and cellular structure. Nevertheless, considerable evidence suggests that the Type-II photo-oxygenation process predominates in the induction of cell damage, a consequence of the interaction between the irradiated photosensitiser and molecular oxygen. Cells in vivo may be partially protected against the effects of photodynamic therapy by the presence of singlet oxygen scavengers (such as histidine). Certain skin cells are somewhat resistant to PDT in the absence of molecular oxygen; further supporting the proposal that the Type-II process is at the heart of photoinitiated cell death.[3]

The efficiency of Type-II processes is dependent upon the triplet state lifetime τT and the triplet quantum yield (ΦT) of the photosensitiser. Both of these parameters have been implicated in phototherapeutic effectiveness; further supporting the distinction between Type-I and Type-II mechanisms. However, the success of a photosensitiser is not exclusively dependent upon a Type-II process. Multiple photosensitisers display excited triplet lifetimes that are too short to permit a Type-II process to occur. For example, the copper metallated octaethylbenzochlorin photosensitiser has a triplet state lifetime of less than 20 nanoseconds and is still deemed to be an efficient photodynamic agent.[3]

Photosensitizers

[edit]

Many photosensitizers for PDT exist. They divide into porphyrins, chlorins and dyes.[6] Examples include aminolevulinic acid (ALA), Silicon Phthalocyanine Pc 4, m-tetrahydroxyphenylchlorin (mTHPC) and mono-L-aspartyl chlorin e6 (NPe6).

Photosensitizers commercially available for clinical use include Allumera, Photofrin, Visudyne, Levulan, Foscan, Metvix, Hexvix, Cysview and Laserphyrin, with others in development, e.g. Antrin, Photochlor, Photosens, Photrex, Lumacan, Cevira, Visonac, BF-200 ALA,[6][7] Amphinex[8] and Azadipyrromethenes.

The major difference between photosensitizers is the parts of the cell that they target. Unlike in radiation therapy, where damage is done by targeting cell DNA, most photosensitizers target other cell structures. For example, mTHPC localizes in the nuclear envelope.[9] In contrast, ALA localizes in the mitochondria[10] and methylene blue in the lysosomes.[11]

Cyclic tetrapyrrolic chromophores

[edit]

Cyclic tetrapyrrolic molecules are fluorophores and photosensitisers. Cyclic tetrapyrrolic derivatives have an inherent similarity to the naturally occurring porphyrins present in living matter.

Porphyrins

[edit]

Porphyrins are a group of naturally occurring and intensely coloured compounds, whose name is drawn from the Greek word porphura, or purple. These molecules perform biologically important roles, including oxygen transport and photosynthesis and have applications in fields ranging from fluorescent imaging to medicine. Porphyrins are tetrapyrrolic molecules, with the heart of the skeleton a heterocyclic macrocycle, known as a porphine. The fundamental porphine frame consists of four pyrrolic sub-units linked on opposing sides (α-positions, numbered 1, 4, 6, 9, 11, 14, 16 and 19) through four methine (CH) bridges (5, 10, 15 and 20), known as the meso-carbon atoms/positions. The resulting conjugated planar macrocycle may be substituted at the meso- and/or β-positions (2, 3, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17 and 18): if the meso- and β-hydrogens are substituted with non-hydrogen atoms or groups, the resulting compounds are known as porphyrins.[3]

The inner two protons of a free-base porphyrin can be removed by strong bases such as alkoxides, forming a dianionic molecule; conversely, the inner two pyrrolenine nitrogens can be protonated with acids such as trifluoroacetic acid affording a dicationic intermediate. The tetradentate anionic species can readily form complexes with most metals.[3]

Absorption spectroscopy
[edit]

Porphyrin's highly conjugated skeleton produces a characteristic ultra-violet visible (UV-VIS) spectrum. The spectrum typically consists of an intense, narrow absorption band (ε > 200000 L⋅mol−1 cm−1) at around 400 nm, known as the Soret band or B band, followed by four longer wavelength (450–700 nm), weaker absorptions (ε > 20000 L⋅mol−1⋅cm−1 (free-base porphyrins)) referred to as the Q bands.

The Soret band arises from a strong electronic transition from the ground state to the second excited singlet state (S0 → S2); whereas the Q band is a result of a weak transition to the first excited singlet state (S0 → S1). The dissipation of energy via internal conversion (IC) is so rapid that fluorescence is only observed from depopulation of the first excited singlet state to the lower-energy ground state (S1 → S0).[3]

Ideal photosensitisers

[edit]

The key characteristic of a photosensitiser is the ability to preferentially accumulate in diseased tissue and induce a desired biological effect via the generation of cytotoxic species. Specific criteria:[12]

  • Strong absorption with a high extinction coefficient in the red/near infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum (600–850 nm)—allows deeper tissue penetration. (Tissue is much more transparent at longer wavelengths (~700–850 nm). Longer wavelengths allow the light to penetrate deeper[8] and treat larger structures.)[8]
  • Suitable photophysical characteristics: a high-quantum yield of triplet formation (ΦT ≥ 0.5); a high singlet oxygen quantum yield (ΦΔ ≥ 0.5); a relatively long triplet state lifetime (τT, μs range); and a high triplet-state energy (≥ 94 kJ mol−1). Values of ΦT= 0.83 and ΦΔ = 0.65 (haematoporphyrin); ΦT = 0.83 and ΦΔ = 0.72 (etiopurpurin); and ΦT = 0.96 and ΦΔ = 0.82 (tin etiopurpurin) have been achieved
  • Low dark toxicity and negligible cytotoxicity in the absence of light. (The photosensitizer should not be harmful to the target tissue until the treatment beam is applied.)
  • Preferential accumulation in diseased/target tissue over healthy tissue
  • Rapid clearance from the body post-procedure
  • High chemical stability: single, well-characterised compounds, with a known and constant composition
  • Short and high-yielding synthetic route (with easy translation into multi-gram scales/reactions)
  • Simple and stable formulation
  • Soluble in biological media, allowing intravenous administration. Otherwise, a hydrophilic delivery system must enable efficient and effective transportation of the photosensitiser to the target site via the bloodstream.
  • Low photobleaching to prevent degradation of the photosensitizer so it can continue producing singlet oxygen
  • Natural fluorescence (Many optical dosimetry techniques, such as fluorescence spectroscopy, depend on fluorescence.)[13]

First generation

[edit]

Porfimer sodium

Porfimer sodium is a drug used to treat some types of cancer. When absorbed by cancer cells and exposed to light, porfimer sodium becomes active and kills the cancer cells. It is a type of photodynamic therapy (PDT) agent and also called Photofrin.[14]

PDT was first discovered more than a century ago in Germany, it was not until Thomas Dougherty's[15] when PDT became more mainstream. Prior to Dr. Dougherty, researchers had ways of using light-sensitive compounds to treat disease. Dougherty successfully treated cancer with PDT in preclinical models in 1975. Three years later, he conducted the first controlled clinical study in humans. In 1994, the FDA approved PDT with the photosensitizer porfimer sodium for palliative treatment of advanced esophageal cancer, specifically the palliation of patients with completely obstructing esophageal cancer, or for patients with partially obstructing esophageal cancer. Porfimer Sodium is also FDA-approved for the treatment of types of lung cancer, more specifically for the treatment of microinvasive endobronchial non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in patients for whom surgery and radiotherapy are not indicated and also FDA approved in the US for high grade dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus.[16][17][18]

Disadvantages associated with first generation photosensitisers include skin sensitivity and absorption at 630 nm permitted some therapeutic use, but they markedly limited application to the wider field of disease. Second generation photosensitisers were key to the development of photodynamic therapy.[3]

Second generation

[edit]

5-Aminolaevulinic acid

[edit]

5-Aminolaevulinic acid (ALA) is a prodrug used to treat and image multiple superficial cancers and tumours. ALA a key precursor in the biosynthesis of the naturally occurring porphyrin, haem.[3]

Haem is synthesised in every energy-producing cell in the body and is a key structural component of haemoglobin, myoglobin and other haemproteins. The immediate precursor to haem is protoporphyrin IX (PPIX), an effective photosensitiser. Haem itself is not a photosensitiser, due to the coordination of a paramagnetic ion in the centre of the macrocycle, causing significant reduction in excited state lifetimes.[3]

The haem molecule is synthesised from glycine and succinyl coenzyme A (succinyl CoA). The rate-limiting step in the biosynthesis pathway is controlled by a tight (negative) feedback mechanism in which the concentration of haem regulates the production of ALA. However, this controlled feedback can be by-passed by artificially adding excess exogenous ALA to cells. The cells respond by producing PPIX (photosensitiser) at a faster rate than the ferrochelatase enzyme can convert it to haem.[3]

ALA, marketed as Levulan, has shown promise in photodynamic therapy (tumours) via both intravenous and oral administration, as well as through topical administration in the treatment of malignant and non-malignant dermatological conditions, including psoriasis, Bowen's disease and Hirsutism (Phase II/III clinical trials).[3]

ALA accumulates more rapidly in comparison to other intravenously administered sensitisers. Typical peak tumour accumulation levels post-administration for PPIX are usually achieved within several hours; other (intravenous) photosensitisers may take up to 96 hours to reach peak levels. ALA is also excreted more rapidly from the body (~24 hours) than other photosensitisers, minimising photosensitivity side effects.[3]

Esterified ALA derivatives with improved bioavailability have been examined. A methyl ALA ester (Metvix) is now available for basal cell carcinoma and other skin lesions. Benzyl (Benvix) and hexyl ester (Hexvix) derivatives are used for gastrointestinal cancers and for the diagnosis of bladder cancer.[3]

Verteporfin

[edit]

Benzoporphyrin derivative monoacid ring A (BPD-MA), marketed as Visudyne (Verteporfin, for injection), has been approved by health authorities in multiple jurisdictions, including US FDA, for the treatment of wet AMD beginning in 1999. It has also undergone Phase III clinical trials (USA) for the treatment of cutaneous non-melanoma skin cancer.[3]

The chromophore of BPD-MA has a red-shifted and intensified long-wavelength absorption maxima at approximately 690 nm. Tissue penetration by light at this wavelength is 50% greater than that achieved for Photofrin (λmax. = 630 nm).[3]

Verteporfin has further advantages over the first generation sensitiser Photofrin. It is rapidly absorbed by the tumour (optimal tumour-normal tissue ratio 30–150 minutes post-intravenous injection) and is rapidly cleared from the body, minimising patient photosensitivity (1–2 days).[3]

Purlytin

[edit]

Chlorin photosensitiser tin etiopurpurin is marketed as Purlytin. Purlytin has undergone Phase II clinical trials for cutaneous metastatic breast cancer and Kaposi's sarcoma in patients with AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome). Purlytin has been used successfully to treat the non-malignant conditions psoriasis and restenosis.[3]

Chlorins are distinguished from the parent porphyrins by a reduced exocyclic double bond, decreasing the symmetry of the conjugated macrocycle. This leads to increased absorption in the long-wavelength portion of the visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum (650–680 nm). Purlytin is a purpurin; a degradation product of chlorophyll.[3]

Purlytin has a tin atom chelated in its central cavity that causes a red-shift of approximately 20–30 nm (with respect to Photofrin and non-metallated etiopurpurin, λmax.SnEt2 = 650 nm). Purlytin has been reported to localise in skin and produce a photoreaction 7–14 days post-administration.[3]

Foscan

[edit]

Tetra(m-hydroxyphenyl)chlorin (mTHPC) is in clinical trials for head and neck cancers under the trade name Foscan. It has also been investigated in clinical trials for gastric and pancreatic cancers, hyperplasia, field sterilisation after cancer surgery and for the control of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.[3]

Foscan has a singlet oxygen quantum yield comparable to other chlorin photosensitisers but lower drug and light doses (approximately 100 times more photoactive than Photofrin).[3]

Foscan can render patients photosensitive for up to 20 days after initial illumination.[3]

Lutex

[edit]

Lutetium texaphyrin, marketed under the trade name Lutex and Lutrin, is a large porphyrin-like molecule. Texaphyrins are expanded porphyrins that have a penta-aza core. It offers strong absorption in the 730–770 nm region. Tissue transparency is optimal in this range. As a result, Lutex-based PDT can (potentially) be carried out more effectively at greater depths and on larger tumours.[3]

Lutex has entered Phase II clinical trials for evaluation against breast cancer and malignant melanomas.[3]

A Lutex derivative, Antrin, has undergone Phase I clinical trials for the prevention of restenosis of vessels after cardiac angioplasty by photoinactivating foam cells that accumulate within arteriolar plaques. A second Lutex derivative, Optrin, is in Phase I trials for AMD.[3]

Texaphyrins also have potential as radiosensitisers (Xcytrin) and chemosensitisers. Xcytrin, a gadolinium texaphyrin (motexafin gadolinium), has been evaluated in Phase III clinical trials against brain metastases and Phase I clinical trials for primary brain tumours.[3]

ATMPn

[edit]

9-Acetoxy-2,7,12,17-tetrakis-(β-methoxyethyl)-porphycene has been evaluated as an agent for dermatological applications against psoriasis vulgaris and superficial non-melanoma skin cancer.[3]

Zinc phthalocyanine

[edit]

A liposomal formulation of zinc phthalocyanine (CGP55847) has undergone clinical trials (Phase I/II, Switzerland) against squamous cell carcinomas of the upper aerodigestive tract. Phthalocyanines (PCs) are related to tetra-aza porphyrins. Instead of four bridging carbon atoms at the meso-positions, as for the porphyrins, PCs have four nitrogen atoms linking the pyrrolic sub-units. PCs also have an extended conjugate pathway: a benzene ring is fused to the β-positions of each of the four-pyrrolic sub-units. These rings strengthen the absorption of the chromophore at longer wavelengths (with respect to porphyrins). The absorption band of PCs is almost two orders of magnitude stronger than the highest Q band of haematoporphyrin. These favourable characteristics, along with the ability to selectively functionalise their peripheral structure, make PCs favourable photosensitiser candidates.[3]

A sulphonated aluminium PC derivative (Photosense) has entered clinical trials (Russia) against skin, breast and lung malignancies and cancer of the gastrointestinal tract. Sulphonation significantly increases PC solubility in polar solvents including water, circumventing the need for alternative delivery vehicles.[3]

PC4 is a silicon complex under investigation for the sterilisation of blood components against human colon, breast and ovarian cancers and against glioma.[3]

A shortcoming of many of the metallo-PCs is their tendency to aggregate in aqueous buffer (pH 7.4), resulting in a decrease, or total loss, of their photochemical activity. This behaviour can be minimised in the presence of detergents.[3]

Metallated cationic porphyrazines (PZ), including PdPZ+, CuPZ+, CdPZ+, MgPZ+, AlPZ+ and GaPZ+, have been tested in vitro on V-79 (Chinese hamster lung fibroblast) cells. These photosensitisers display substantial dark toxicity.[3]

Naphthalocyanines

[edit]

Naphthalocyanines (NCs) are an extended PC derivative. They have an additional benzene ring attached to each isoindole sub-unit on the periphery of the PC structure. Subsequently, NCs absorb strongly at even longer wavelengths (approximately 740–780 nm) than PCs (670–780 nm). This absorption in the near infrared region makes NCs candidates for highly pigmented tumours, including melanomas, which present significant absorption problems for visible light.[3]

However, problems associated with NC photosensitisers include lower stability, as they decompose in the presence of light and oxygen. Metallo-NCs, which lack axial ligands, have a tendency to form H-aggregates in solution. These aggregates are photoinactive, thus compromising the photodynamic efficacy of NCs.[3]

Silicon naphthalocyanine attached to copolymer PEG-PCL (poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(ε-caprolactone)) accumulates selectively in cancer cells and reaches a maximum concentration after about one day. The compound provides real time near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging with an extinction coefficient of 2.8 × 105 M−1 cm−1 and combinatorial phototherapy with dual photothermal and photodynamic therapeutic mechanisms that may be appropriate for adriamycin-resistant tumors. The particles had a hydrodynamic size of 37.66 ± 0.26 nm (polydispersity index = 0.06) and surface charge of −2.76 ± 1.83 mV.[19]

Functional groups

[edit]

Altering the peripheral functionality of porphyrin-type chromophores can affect photodynamic activity.[3]

Diamino platinum porphyrins show high anti-tumour activity, demonstrating the combined effect of the cytotoxicity of the platinum complex and the photodynamic activity of the porphyrin species.[3]

Positively charged PC derivatives have been investigated. Cationic species are believed to selectively localise in the mitochondria.[3]

Zinc and copper cationic derivatives have been investigated. The positively charged zinc complexed PC is less photodynamically active than its neutral counterpart in vitro against V-79 cells.[3]

Water-soluble cationic porphyrins bearing nitrophenyl, aminophenyl, hydroxyphenyl and/or pyridiniumyl functional groups exhibit varying cytotoxicity to cancer cells in vitro, depending on the nature of the metal ion (Mn, Fe, Zn, Ni) and on the number and type of functional groups. The manganese pyridiniumyl derivative has shown the highest photodynamic activity, while the nickel analogue is photoinactive.[3]

Another metallo-porphyrin complex, the iron chelate, is more photoactive (towards HIV and simian immunodeficiency virus in MT-4 cells) than the manganese complexes; the zinc derivative is photoinactive.[3]

The hydrophilic sulphonated porphyrins and PCs (AlPorphyrin and AlPC) compounds were tested for photodynamic activity. The disulphonated analogues (with adjacent substituted sulphonated groups) exhibited greater photodynamic activity than their di-(symmetrical), mono-, tri- and tetra-sulphonated counterparts; tumour activity increased with increasing degree of sulphonation.[3]

Third generation

[edit]

Many photosensitisers are poorly soluble in aqueous media, particularly at physiological pH, limiting their use.[3]

Alternate delivery strategies range from the use of oil-in-water (o/w) emulsions to carrier vehicles such as liposomes and nanoparticles. Although these systems may increase therapeutic effects, the carrier system may inadvertently decrease the "observed" singlet oxygen quantum yield (ΦΔ): the singlet oxygen generated by the photosensitiser must diffuse out of the carrier system; and since singlet oxygen is believed to have a narrow radius of action, it may not reach the target cells. The carrier may limit light absorption, reducing singlet oxygen yield.[3]

Another alternative that does not display the scattering problem is the use of moieties. Strategies include directly attaching photosensitisers to biologically active molecules such as antibodies.[3]

Metallation

[edit]

Various metals form into complexes with photosensitiser macrocycles. Multiple second generation photosensitisers contain a chelated central metal ion. The main candidates are transition metals, although photosensitisers co-ordinated to group 13 (Al, AlPcS4) and group 14 (Si, SiNC and Sn, SnEt2) metals have been synthesised.[3]

The metal ion does not confer definite photoactivity on the complex. Copper (II), cobalt (II), iron (II) and zinc (II) complexes of Hp are all photoinactive in contrast to metal-free porphyrins. However, texaphyrin and PC photosensitisers do not contain metals; only the metallo-complexes have demonstrated efficient photosensitisation.[3]

The central metal ion, bound by a number of photosensitisers, strongly influences the photophysical properties of the photosensitiser. Chelation of paramagnetic metals to a PC chromophore appears to shorten triplet lifetimes (down to nanosecond range), generating variations in the triplet quantum yield and triplet lifetime of the photoexcited triplet state.[3]

Certain heavy metals are known to enhance inter-system crossing (ISC). Generally, diamagnetic metals promote ISC and have a long triplet lifetime. In contrast, paramagnetic species deactivate excited states, reducing the excited-state lifetime and preventing photochemical reactions. However, exceptions to this generalisation include copper octaethylbenzochlorin.[3]

Many metallated paramagnetic texaphyrin species exhibit triplet-state lifetimes in the nanosecond range. These results are mirrored by metallated PCs. PCs metallated with diamagnetic ions, such as Zn2+, Al3+ and Ga3+, generally yield photosensitisers with desirable quantum yields and lifetimes (ΦT 0.56, 0.50 and 0.34 and τT 187, 126 and 35 μs, respectively). Photosensitiser ZnPcS4 has a singlet oxygen quantum yield of 0.70; nearly twice that of most other mPCs (ΦΔ at least 0.40).[3]

Expanded metallo-porphyrins

[edit]

Expanded porphyrins have a larger central binding cavity, increasing the range of potential metals.[3]

Diamagnetic metallo-texaphyrins have shown photophysical properties; high triplet quantum yields and efficient generation of singlet oxygen. In particular, the zinc and cadmium derivatives display triplet quantum yields close to unity. In contrast, the paramagnetic metallo-texaphyrins, Mn-Tex, Sm-Tex and Eu-Tex, have undetectable triplet quantum yields. This behaviour is parallel with that observed for the corresponding metallo-porphyrins.[3]

The cadmium-texaphyrin derivative has shown in vitro photodynamic activity against human leukemia cells and Gram positive (Staphylococcus) and Gram negative (Escherichia coli) bacteria. Although follow-up studies have been limited with this photosensitiser due to the toxicity of the complexed cadmium ion.[3]

A zinc-metallated seco-porphyrazine has a high quantum singlet oxygen yield (ΦΔ 0.74). This expanded porphyrin-like photosensitiser has shown the best singlet oxygen photosensitising ability of any of the reported seco-porphyrazines. Platinum and palladium derivatives have been synthesised with singlet oxygen quantum yields of 0.59 and 0.54, respectively.[3]

Metallochlorins/bacteriochlorins

[edit]

The tin (IV) purpurins are more active when compared with analogous zinc (II) purpurins, against human cancers.[3]

Sulphonated benzochlorin derivatives demonstrated a reduced phototherapeutic response against murine leukemia L1210 cells in vitro and transplanted urothelial cell carcinoma in rats, whereas the tin (IV) metallated benzochlorins exhibited an increased photodynamic effect in the same tumour model.[3]

Copper octaethylbenzochlorin demonstrated greater photoactivity towards leukemia cells in vitro and a rat bladder tumour model. It may derive from interactions between the cationic iminium group and biomolecules. Such interactions may allow electron-transfer reactions to take place via the short-lived excited singlet state and lead to the formation of radicals and radical ions. The copper-free derivative exhibited a tumour response with short intervals between drug administration and photodynamic activity. Increased in vivo activity was observed with the zinc benzochlorin analogue.[3]

Metallo-phthalocyanines

[edit]

PCs properties are strongly influenced by the central metal ion. Co-ordination of transition metal ions gives metallo-complexes with short triplet lifetimes (nanosecond range), resulting in different triplet quantum yields and lifetimes (with respect to the non-metallated analogues). Diamagnetic metals such as zinc, aluminium and gallium, generate metallo-phthalocyanines (MPC) with high triplet quantum yields (ΦT ≥ 0.4) and short lifetimes (ZnPCS4 τT = 490 Fs and AlPcS4 τT = 400 Fs) and high singlet oxygen quantum yields (ΦΔ ≥ 0.7). As a result, ZnPc and AlPc have been evaluated as second generation photosensitisers active against certain tumours.[3]

Metallo-naphthocyaninesulfobenzo-porphyrazines (M-NSBP)

[edit]

Aluminium (Al3+) has been successfully coordinated to M-NSBP. The resulting complex showed photodynamic activity against EMT-6 tumour-bearing Balb/c mice (disulphonated analogue demonstrated greater photoactivity than the mono-derivative).[3]

Metallo-naphthalocyanines

[edit]

Work with zinc NC with various amido substituents revealed that the best phototherapeutic response (Lewis lung carcinoma in mice) with a tetrabenzamido analogue. Complexes of silicon (IV) NCs with two axial ligands in anticipation the ligands minimise aggregation. Disubstituted analogues as potential photodynamic agents (a siloxane NC substituted with two methoxyethyleneglycol ligands) are an efficient photosensitiser against Lewis lung carcinoma in mice. SiNC[OSi(i-Bu)2-n-C18H37]2 is effective against Balb/c mice MS-2 fibrosarcoma cells. Siloxane NCs may be efficacious photosensitisers against EMT-6 tumours in Balb/c mice. The ability of metallo-NC derivatives (AlNc) to generate singlet oxygen is weaker than the analogous (sulphonated) metallo-PCs (AlPC); reportedly 1.6–3 orders of magnitude less.[3]

In porphyrin systems, the zinc ion (Zn2+) appears to hinder the photodynamic activity of the compound. By contrast, in the higher/expanded π-systems, zinc-chelated dyes form complexes with good to high results.[3]

An extensive study of metallated texaphyrins focused on the lanthanide (III) metal ions, Y, In, Lu, Cd, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm and Yb found that when diamagnetic Lu (III) was complexed to texaphyrin, an effective photosensitiser (Lutex) was generated. However, using the paramagnetic Gd (III) ion for the Lu metal, exhibited no photodynamic activity. The study found a correlation between the excited-singlet and triplet state lifetimes and the rate of ISC of the diamagnetic texaphyrin complexes, Y(III), In (III) and Lu (III) and the atomic number of the cation.[3]

Paramagnetic metallo-texaphyrins displayed rapid ISC. Triplet lifetimes were strongly affected by the choice of metal ion. The diamagnetic ions (Y, In and Lu) displayed triplet lifetimes ranging from 187, 126 and 35 μs, respectively. Comparable lifetimes for the paramagnetic species (Eu-Tex 6.98 μs, Gd-Tex 1.11, Tb-Tex < 0.2, Dy-Tex 0.44 × 10−3, Ho-Tex 0.85 × 10−3, Er-Tex 0.76 × 10−3, Tm-Tex 0.12 × 10−3 and Yb-Tex 0.46) were obtained.[3]

Three measured paramagnetic complexes measured significantly lower than the diamagnetic metallo-texaphyrins.[3]

In general, singlet oxygen quantum yields closely followed the triplet quantum yields.[3]

Various diamagnetic and paramagnetic texaphyrins investigated have independent photophysical behaviour with respect to a complex's magnetism. The diamagnetic complexes were characterised by relatively high fluorescence quantum yields, excited-singlet and triplet lifetimes and singlet oxygen quantum yields; in distinct contrast to the paramagnetic species.[3]

The +2 charged diamagnetic species appeared to exhibit a direct relationship between their fluorescence quantum yields, excited state lifetimes, rate of ISC and the atomic number of the metal ion. The greatest diamagnetic ISC rate was observed for Lu-Tex; a result ascribed to the heavy atom effect. The heavy atom effect also held for the Y-Tex, In-Tex and Lu-Tex triplet quantum yields and lifetimes. The triplet quantum yields and lifetimes both decreased with increasing atomic number. The singlet oxygen quantum yield correlated with this observation.

Photophysical properties displayed by paramagnetic species were more complex. The observed data/behaviour was not correlated with the number of unpaired electrons located on the metal ion. For example:

  • ISC rates and the fluorescence lifetimes gradually decreased with increasing atomic number.
  • Gd-Tex and Tb-Tex chromophores showed (despite more unpaired electrons) slower rates of ISC and longer lifetimes than Ho-Tex or Dy-Tex.

To achieve selective target cell destruction, while protecting normal tissues, either the photosensitizer can be applied locally to the target area, or targets can be locally illuminated. Skin conditions, including acne, psoriasis and also skin cancers, can be treated topically and locally illuminated. For internal tissues and cancers, intravenously administered photosensitizers can be illuminated using endoscopes and fiber optic catheters.[citation needed]

Photosensitizers can target viral and microbial species, including HIV and MRSA.[20] Using PDT, pathogens present in samples of blood and bone marrow can be decontaminated before the samples are used further for transfusions or transplants.[21] PDT can also eradicate a wide variety of pathogens of the skin and of the oral cavities. Given the seriousness that drug resistant pathogens have now become, there is increasing research into PDT as a new antimicrobial therapy.[22]

Applications

[edit]

Acne

[edit]

PDT is currently in clinical trials as a treatment for severe acne. Initial results have shown for it to be effective as a treatment only for severe acne.[23] A systematic review conducted in 2016 found that PDT is a "safe and effective method of treatment" for acne.[24] The treatment may cause severe redness and moderate to severe pain and burning sensation in some people. (see also: Levulan) One phase II trial, while it showed improvement, was not superior to blue/violet light alone.[25]

Cancer

[edit]

The FDA has approved photodynamic therapy to treat actinic keratosis, advanced cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, Barrett esophagus, basal cell skin cancer, esophageal (throat) cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, and squamous cell skin cancer (Stage 0). Photodynamic therapy is also used to relieve symptoms of some cancers, including esophageal cancer when it blocks the throat and non-small cell lung cancer when it blocks the airways.[26]

When cells that have absorbed photosensitizers are exposed to a specific wavelength of light, the photosensitizer produces a form of oxygen, called an oxygen radical, that kills them. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) may also damage blood vessels in the tumor, which prevents it from receiving the blood it needs to keep growing. PDT may trigger the immune system to attack tumor cells, even in other areas of the body.[26][27]

PDT is a minimally invasive treatment that is used to treat many conditions including acne, psoriasis, age related macular degeneration, and several cancers such as skin, lung,[28] brain, mesothelioma,[29][30] bladder, bile-duct,[31] esophageal, and head and neck cancers.[32][33][34][35]

In February 2019, medical scientists announced that iridium attached to albumin, creating a photosensitized molecule, can penetrate cancer cells and, after being irradiated with light, destroy the cancer cells.[36][37]

Photoimmunotherapy

[edit]

Photoimmunotherapy is an oncological treatment for various cancers that combines photodynamic therapy of tumor with immunotherapy treatment. Combining photodynamic therapy with immunotherapy enhances the immunostimulating response and has synergistic effects for metastatic cancer treatment.[38][39][40]

Vascular targeting

[edit]

Some photosensitisers naturally accumulate in the endothelial cells of vascular tissue allowing 'vascular targeted' PDT.

Verteporfin was shown to target the neovasculature resulting from macular degeneration in the macula within the first thirty minutes after intravenous administration of the drug.

Compared to normal tissues, most types of cancers are especially active in both the uptake and accumulation of photosensitizers agents, which makes cancers especially vulnerable to PDT.[41] Since photosensitizers can also have a high affinity for vascular endothelial cells.[42]

Ophthalmology

[edit]

As cited above[citation needed], verteporfin was widely approved for the treatment of wet age-related macular degeneration beginning in 1999. The drug targets the neovasculature that is caused by the condition.

Antimicrobial effects

[edit]

Photodynamic skin disinfection is effective at killing topical microbes, including drug-resistant bacteria, viruses, and fungi.[43][better source needed] Photodynamic disinfection remains effective after repeat treatments, with no evidence of resistance formation.[44] The method can effectively treat polymicrobial antibiotic resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilms in a maxillary sinus cavity model.[45]

History

[edit]

Modern era

[edit]

In the late nineteenth century. Finsen successfully demonstrated phototherapy by employing heat-filtered light from a carbon-arc lamp (the "Finsen lamp") in the treatment of a tubercular condition of the skin known as lupus vulgaris, for which he won the 1903 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.[3]

In 1913 another German scientist, Meyer-Betz, described the major stumbling block of photodynamic therapy. After injecting himself with haematoporphyrin (Hp, a photosensitiser), he swiftly experienced a general skin sensitivity upon exposure to sunlight—a recurrent problem with many photosensitisers.[3]

The first evidence that agents, photosensitive synthetic dyes, in combination with a light source and oxygen could have potential therapeutic effect was made at the turn of the 20th century in the laboratory of Hermann von Tappeiner in Munich, Germany. Germany was leading the world in industrial dye synthesis at the time.[3]

While studying the effects of acridine on paramecia cultures, Oscar Raab, a student of von Tappeiner observed a toxic effect. Fortuitously Raab also observed that light was required to kill the paramecia.[46] Subsequent work in von Tappeiner's laboratory showed that oxygen was essential for the 'photodynamic action' – a term coined by von Tappeiner.[47]

Von Tappeiner and colleagues performed the first PDT trial in patients with skin carcinoma using the photosensitizer, eosin. Of six patients with a facial basal cell carcinoma, treated with a 1% eosin solution and long-term exposure either to sunlight or arc-lamp light, four patients showed total tumour resolution and a relapse-free period of 12 months.[48]

In 1924 Policard revealed the diagnostic capabilities of hematoporphyrin fluorescence when he observed that ultraviolet radiation excited red fluorescence in the sarcomas of laboratory rats.[49] Policard hypothesized that the fluorescence was associated with endogenous hematoporphyrin accumulation.

In 1948 Figge and co-workers[50] showed on laboratory animals that porphyrins exhibit a preferential affinity to rapidly dividing cells, including malignant, embryonic and regenerative cells. They proposed that porphyrins could be used to treat cancer.

Photosensitizer Haematoporphyrin Derivative (HpD), was first characterised in 1960 by Lipson.[51] Lipson sought a diagnostic agent suitable for tumor detection. HpD allowed Lipson to pioneer the use of endoscopes and HpD fluorescence.[52] HpD is a porphyrin species derived from haematoporphyrin, Porphyrins have long been considered as suitable agents for tumour photodiagnosis and tumour PDT because cancerous cells exhibit significantly greater uptake and affinity for porphyrins compared to normal tissues. This had been observed by other researchers prior to Lipson.

Thomas Dougherty and co-workers[53] at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in Buffalo, New York, clinically tested PDT in 1978. They treated 113 cutaneous or subcutaneous malignant tumors with HpD and observed total or partial resolution of 111 tumors.[54] Dougherty helped expand clinical trials and formed the International Photodynamic Association, in 1986.[55]

John Toth, product manager for Cooper Medical Devices Corp/Cooper Lasersonics, noticed the "photodynamic chemical effect" of the therapy and wrote the first white paper naming the therapy "Photodynamic Therapy" (PDT) with early clinical argon dye lasers circa 1981. The company set up 10 clinical sites in Japan where the term "radiation" had negative connotations.

HpD, under the brand name Photofrin, was the first PDT agent approved for clinical use in 1993 to treat a form of bladder cancer in Canada. Over the next decade, both PDT and the use of HpD received international attention and greater clinical acceptance and led to the first PDT treatments approved by U.S. Food and Drug Administration Japan and parts of Europe for use against certain cancers of the oesophagus and non-small cell lung cancer.[3]

[56] Photofrin had the disadvantages of prolonged patient photosensitivity and a weak long-wavelength absorption (630 nm). This led to the development of second generation photosensitisers, including Verteporfin (a benzoporphyrin derivative, also known as Visudyne) and more recently, third generation targetable photosensitisers, such as antibody-directed photosensitisers.[3]

In the 1980s, David Dolphin, Julia Levy and colleagues developed a novel photosensitizer, verteporfin.[57][58] Verteporfin, a porphyrin derivative, is activated at 690 nm, a much longer wavelength than Photofrin. It has the property of preferential uptake by neovasculature. It has been widely tested for its use in treating skin cancers and received FDA approval in 2000 for the treatment of wet age related macular degeneration. As such it was the first medical treatment ever approved for this condition, which is a major cause of vision loss.

Russian scientists pioneered a photosensitizer called Photogem which, like HpD, was derived from haematoporphyrin in 1990 by Mironov and coworkers. Photogem was approved by the Ministry of Health of Russia and tested clinically from February 1992 to 1996. A pronounced therapeutic effect was observed in 91 percent of the 1500 patients. 62 percent had total tumor resolution. A further 29 percent had >50% tumor shrinkage. In early diagnosis patients 92 percent experienced complete resolution.[59]

Russian scientists collaborated with NASA scientists who were looking at the use of LEDs as more suitable light sources, compared to lasers, for PDT applications.[60][61][62]

Since 1990, the Chinese have been developing clinical expertise with PDT, using domestically produced photosensitizers, derived from Haematoporphyrin.[63] China is notable for its expertise in resolving difficult-to-reach tumours.[64]

Miscellany

[edit]

PUVA therapy uses psoralen as photosensitiser and UVA ultraviolet as light source, but this form of therapy is usually classified as a separate form of therapy from photodynamic therapy.[65][66]

To allow treatment of deeper tumours some researchers are using internal chemiluminescence to activate the photosensitiser.[67]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a minimally invasive medical treatment that employs a photosensitizing agent, light of a specific , and molecular oxygen to produce , which selectively destroy targeted cells such as cancer cells or abnormal tissues. The therapy's selectivity arises from the localized accumulation of the in diseased tissues and the precise application of light, limiting damage to surrounding healthy areas. It is important to distinguish PDT from red light therapy (RLT), a drug-free treatment typically used in home devices for general wellness and skin rejuvenation, which does not involve photosensitizers and relies solely on low-level light to stimulate cellular functions. The mechanism of PDT involves a photochemical reaction where the , upon absorbing light (typically in the red or near-infrared for deeper penetration), transfers energy to oxygen molecules, generating and other radicals that induce cellular , , vascular shutdown, and immune responses. Common include porfimer sodium (Photofrin), approved by the FDA in 1995 for certain cancers, and topical agents like 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) or methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) for superficial conditions. Light sources such as lasers or light-emitting diodes (LEDs) deliver wavelengths around 630–700 nm, with tissue penetration limited to approximately 1 cm, making PDT ideal for superficial or accessible lesions. PDT is FDA-approved for treating conditions including (with clearance rates up to 91% using ALA-PDT), superficial , causing blockages, and early-stage non-small cell obstructing airways. It is also used off-label for dermatologic issues like acne vulgaris, viral warts, and , as well as non-oncologic applications such as antimicrobial therapy for infections. Advantages include excellent cosmetic outcomes with minimal scarring, outpatient feasibility, and reduced systemic toxicity compared to traditional or . However, limitations such as lasting weeks, during treatment, and inefficacy for deep tumors due to penetration issues persist. Pioneered in the early but clinically advanced in the with hematoporphyrin derivatives, PDT continues to evolve with third-generation photosensitizers incorporating for targeted delivery and research into photoimmunotherapy for enhanced efficacy in head and neck cancers. Ongoing clinical trials explore its potential in antimicrobial applications, including against drug-resistant bacteria, and emerging roles in treating inflammatory diseases like .

Principles

Core Components

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a minimally invasive treatment modality that utilizes a , activation, and molecular oxygen to generate cytotoxic effects in targeted tissues, primarily for cancer and other pathological conditions. The process requires the simultaneous presence of these three core components to initiate therapeutic action, distinguishing PDT from other light-based therapies. The serves as the key agent that absorbs , becoming activated to transfer that to surrounding molecules, which ultimately leads to . , typically delivered via precise sources, must match the absorption of the to ensure efficient activation, with wavelengths in the 600-800 nm range preferred for optimal tissue penetration of several millimeters. Common sources include lasers, which provide coherent, monochromatic illumination for deep or delivery, and light-emitting diodes (LEDs), which offer broad-spectrum, incoherent suitable for superficial applications. These sources are selected based on the treatment site's depth and the 's peak absorption, ensuring the reaches the target without excessive or absorption by and . Molecular oxygen is indispensable for the photochemical reactions in PDT, acting as the primary acceptor of energy from the activated to produce that mediate . PDT's efficacy is particularly limited in hypoxic tumor environments, where low oxygen levels reduce generation; however, strategies like can enhance treatment outcomes by increasing tissue oxygenation in such regions. This oxygen dependency underscores the therapy's selectivity for well-oxygenated tissues while highlighting the need for adjunctive methods to overcome hypoxia in solid tumors.

Photophysical Processes

Photodynamic therapy relies on the initial photophysical processes that occur when a photosensitizer (PS) absorbs light, transitioning from its ground state to an excited state capable of subsequent energy transfer. The PS, typically in its singlet ground state (S₀), absorbs a photon with energy matching its absorption spectrum, promoting an electron to the lowest excited singlet state (S₁). This excitation is the first step in the Jablonski diagram, which illustrates the electronic states and transitions involved in these processes. From the S₁ state, the PS can undergo several deactivation pathways, but for effective PDT, the dominant process is (ISC) to the triplet (T₁). ISC involves a spin flip, converting the paired electrons in S₁ to unpaired electrons in T₁, and is represented vertically in the due to its rapid occurrence (on the order of picoseconds to nanoseconds). The efficiency of this transition is quantified by the of intersystem crossing (Φ_ISC), which should be high for ideal PS; values exceeding 0.8 are common in clinically relevant compounds. Competing with ISC from S₁ is , the radiative decay back to S₀, which emits light in the visible to near-infrared range and occurs on a timescale. In contrast, the T₁ state enables , a slower radiative decay to S₀ forbidden by spin selection rules but observable at longer wavelengths, with lifetimes extending to microseconds or longer. The extended lifetime of T₁—typically tens of microseconds in deoxygenated environments—allows sufficient time for energy transfer to substrates, a key precursor to therapeutic effects. The efficiency of ISC is enhanced by spin-orbit coupling, which relaxes spin conservation rules and promotes the singlet-to-triplet transition; this effect is amplified in PS containing heavy atoms (e.g., iodine or palladium), known as the heavy-atom effect. Such substitutions increase Φ_ISC while often quenching fluorescence, prioritizing the population of the long-lived T₁ state essential for PDT.

Photochemical Mechanisms

In photodynamic therapy, the photochemical mechanisms initiate from the triplet excited state of the photosensitizer (PS), leading to two primary pathways: Type I and Type II reactions. The Type II mechanism predominates under aerobic conditions and involves direct energy transfer from the triplet PS to ground-state molecular oxygen, exciting it to its (¹O₂). This process is highly efficient in oxygen-rich environments, where the energy transfer results in the production of as the key cytotoxic species. In contrast, the Type I mechanism proceeds via (or ) transfer from the triplet PS to a biological substrate, such as cellular components, generating radical pairs like PS^{•+} and substrate^{•-}. These radicals can then propagate chain reactions, contributing to oxidative damage, particularly in low-oxygen or hypoxic settings where Type II is limited. The relative contributions of Type I and Type II pathways depend on factors including the PS structure, oxygen concentration, and local environment; Type II typically dominates in well-oxygenated tissues, while Type I becomes more significant at lower oxygen levels. Environmental influences, such as and solvent polarity, further modulate pathway dominance by affecting PS triplet lifetime and reactivity—acidic conditions in tumors may favor certain PS activations, and polar solvents can alter energy transfer efficiencies. A critical metric for Type II efficacy is the singlet oxygen quantum yield (Φ_Δ), which measures the efficiency of ¹O₂ production per absorbed photon; ideal PS candidates exhibit Φ_Δ > 0.5, as seen in reference compounds like Rose Bengal (Φ_Δ = 0.75).

Reactive Oxygen Species Generation

In photodynamic therapy (PDT), reactive oxygen species (ROS) are the primary mediators of cytotoxicity, generated through Type I and Type II photochemical pathways. The dominant ROS is singlet oxygen (¹O₂), produced predominantly via the Type II pathway, where the excited triplet state of the photosensitizer transfers energy to ground-state molecular oxygen. This highly reactive species has a short lifetime of approximately 3 μs in aqueous biological environments, limiting its diffusion radius to about 20-50 nm and enabling localized damage to nearby cellular targets such as lipids, proteins, and DNA. Other ROS, including superoxide anion (O₂•⁻), hydroxyl radical (•OH), and (H₂O₂), arise mainly from the Type I pathway involving electron or hydrogen atom transfer from the to substrates like oxygen or biomolecules. These species contribute to by propagating radical chain reactions; for instance, can dismutate to form , which in the presence of metal ions generates highly reactive hydroxyl radicals via the Fenton reaction. While singlet oxygen accounts for the majority of PDT-induced damage under normoxic conditions, Type I ROS become more prominent in hypoxic environments or with certain . The cytotoxic effects of these ROS stem from their ability to oxidize essential cellular components, leading to membrane disruption through lipid peroxidation, protein denaturation, and DNA strand breaks or base modifications. This oxidative damage triggers multiple cell death pathways, including apoptosis via mitochondrial membrane permeabilization and cytochrome c release at moderate ROS levels, or necrosis at higher doses due to overwhelming cellular injury. Additionally, ROS target the tumor vasculature, causing endothelial cell damage, vasoconstriction, and thrombosis, which collectively starve the tumor of nutrients and oxygen. Detection of singlet oxygen in PDT relies on its near-infrared phosphorescence emission at 1270 nm, a direct and specific method that serves as a dosimetric tool to quantify ROS generation in real-time during treatment. Time-resolved spectroscopy is employed to capture this weak signal (quantum yield ~10⁻⁸), often using sensitive detectors like photomultiplier tubes or single-photon avalanche diodes. However, factors such as tumor hypoxia significantly limit ROS production, as reduced oxygen availability impairs both Type I and Type II pathways, particularly the oxygen-dependent formation of singlet oxygen, thereby decreasing PDT efficacy in poorly oxygenated regions.

Photosensitizers

Ideal Properties

An ideal photosensitizer for photodynamic therapy (PDT) must exhibit strong absorption in the red to near-infrared range of nm to enable deep tissue penetration while minimizing absorption by and . This spectral property allows for effective delivery to target sites, such as tumors, with reduced and higher therapeutic efficacy compared to shorter . A high quantum yield, typically greater than 0.5, is essential for efficient generation of upon photoactivation, directly correlating with the photosensitizer's phototoxic potential. Complementing this, a long lifetime in the range ensures prolonged energy transfer to ground-state oxygen, enhancing overall quantum efficiency; this builds on the fundamental photophysical requirement for to the . Additionally, the should exceed 0.5 to maximize the population of the . Low dark toxicity is a critical attribute, meaning the photosensitizer remains non-cytotoxic in the absence of light, thereby limiting systemic side effects and allowing safe administration. Chemical stability under physiological conditions and at is necessary to maintain during storage, delivery, and . For optimal therapeutic selectivity, the photosensitizer should demonstrate preferential accumulation in diseased tissues, such as via the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect in tumors, coupled with rapid clearance from healthy tissues to minimize prolonged . Amphiphilic character facilitates interaction with cell membranes, promoting cellular uptake and localization at sites of action, while also aiding in biological media. Minimal skin is desirable to reduce patient discomfort and compliance issues post-treatment. However, trade-offs exist; for instance, porphyrin-based structures often absorb effectively at around 630 nm but suffer from poor water , necessitating formulation strategies to balance these properties.

First-Generation Photosensitizers

First-generation photosensitizers in photodynamic therapy (PDT) primarily refer to hematoporphyrin derivative (HpD) and its purified form, porfimer sodium (commercially known as Photofrin), which were the pioneering agents used in early clinical applications. Porfimer sodium is a of oligomeric porphyrins formed by and linkages of up to eight units, derived from the acidification and purification of hematoporphyrin. This compound marked a significant milestone as the first approved for PDT, receiving regulatory approval in in 1993 for the palliative treatment of and in the United States by the FDA in 1995 for . Its development stemmed from foundational work in the by Thomas J. Dougherty and colleagues, who demonstrated selective tumor retention and light-activated in preclinical models. Porfimer sodium is administered via intravenous injection, typically at a dose of 2 mg/kg body weight, allowing systemic distribution followed by selective accumulation in target tissues. Tumor localization occurs primarily through enhanced uptake by neoplastic cells and , facilitated by overexpression of (LDL) receptors on rapidly proliferating tumor cells, which bind and internalize the lipophilic via . This mechanism contributes to higher concentrations in malignant tissues compared to normal ones, although the exact ratio varies by tumor type and can be modest (often 2-3:1). A key limitation of porfimer sodium is its absorption spectrum, with a major peak at approximately 630 nm but a relatively low molar extinction coefficient of approximately 3,500 M⁻¹ cm⁻¹, resulting in weak absorption and limited tissue of only a few millimeters. This necessitates superficial delivery, restricting applications to accessible sites. Additionally, the agent exhibits prolonged retention in , leading to significant cutaneous that persists for 4-6 weeks or longer post-administration, requiring strict sunlight avoidance and impacting patient . Other drawbacks include non-specific uptake by normal tissues, such as and reticuloendothelial organs, and slow clearance ( of days to weeks), which complicates repeated treatments and increases off-target effects. Despite these challenges, porfimer sodium's approval established PDT as a viable clinical modality and paved the way for subsequent advancements in design.

Second-Generation Photosensitizers

Second-generation photosensitizers represent a significant advancement in photodynamic therapy (PDT), consisting of purified and synthetically modified compounds designed to overcome the limitations of first-generation agents, such as prolonged and suboptimal tumor selectivity. These photosensitizers typically feature a porphyrin-like core structure but with structural optimizations for improved , including red-shifted absorption spectra in the 600–800 nm range for deeper tissue penetration, higher quantum yields, and faster clearance to minimize cutaneous side effects. A prominent example is 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA), a prodrug that is metabolized endogenously via the heme biosynthetic pathway to produce protoporphyrin IX (PpIX), the active photosensitizer. ALA is particularly suited for topical or oral administration, enabling localized accumulation in metabolically active cells like those in skin cancers and sebaceous glands, with applications in treating actinic keratosis, basal cell carcinoma, and acne vulgaris. Typical dosing involves a 20% ALA cream applied topically under occlusion for 3–5 hours prior to red light illumination, resulting in high tumor selectivity and minimal systemic toxicity. Verteporfin, a semi-synthetic benzoporphyrin (monoacid ring A), exemplifies vascular-targeted second-generation photosensitizers, primarily approved for photodynamic therapy in age-related () associated with . It exhibits strong absorption at 689 nm, allowing effective activation with red light that penetrates ocular tissues, and demonstrates rapid clearance from the skin ( lasting less than 48 hours), reducing the risk of prolonged adverse effects compared to earlier agents. Intravenous administration at 6 mg/m² followed by activation has shown efficacy in stabilizing vision and reducing progression in clinical trials. Other notable second-generation photosensitizers include meta-tetra(hydroxyphenyl)chlorin (mTHPC, trade name Foscan), a chlorin with a high of approximately 0.7, enabling potent PDT effects at low doses for head and neck cancers. Administered intravenously at 0.15 mg/kg, mTHPC offers enhanced tumor selectivity and reduced phototoxicity due to its lipophilic nature and quick plasma clearance. Photochlor (HPPH), a purified chlorin e6 of hematoporphyrin, provides improved purity over first-generation mixtures like Photofrin, with mild and transient at effective antitumor doses of 4–6 mg/m² IV. texaphyrin (Motexafin lutetium, MLu), a water-soluble expanded , targets tumor vasculature and has been investigated for and cancers, featuring absorption near 730 nm and favorable biodistribution for intravenous delivery at 2–4 mg/kg. These agents collectively enhance PDT's clinical utility through better spectroscopic properties and pharmacokinetic profiles.

Third-Generation and Emerging Photosensitizers

Third-generation photosensitizers represent an evolution in photodynamic therapy (PDT), incorporating multifunctional designs such as metal complexes, targeted conjugates, and nanostructured assemblies to enhance selectivity, , and (ROS) generation while minimizing off-target effects. These agents build on second-generation structures by integrating heavy atoms for improved photophysical properties, for tumor-specific delivery, and novel scaffolds for better . For instance, they often achieve high quantum yields for (approaching 0.9 or higher, aligning with ideal properties) through optimized and reduced aggregation. Metalloporphyrins and chlorins exemplify this generation, with demonstrating enhanced population due to the heavy-atom effect of , which promotes and boosts ROS yields, including (quantum yield ~0.5 in membrane-like environments) and radicals for vascular-targeted applications. Similarly, other metallochlorins like copper-bacteriochlorin complexes exhibit NIR absorption around 740-750 nm, enabling deeper tissue penetration and high PDT efficacy in hypoxic conditions. These metal incorporations increase photostability and triplet yields compared to metal-free analogs, facilitating more efficient energy transfer to oxygen. Phthalocyanines and naphthalocyanines further advance this category with strong NIR absorption in the 700-800 nm range, allowing for greater light penetration into tissues. Zinc phthalocyanine (ZnPc), for example, features a high extinction coefficient (~10^5 M^{-1} cm^{-1}) and efficient ROS production, making it suitable for deep-seated tumors when formulated to reduce aggregation. Naphthalocyanines extend this with even longer-wavelength absorption, enhancing photothermal and photodynamic effects in imaging-guided therapies. Conjugates represent a key strategy for targeting, where photosensitizers are linked to antibodies or peptides for selective tumor accumulation. Antibody-photosensitizer conjugates, such as nanobody-coupled pyropheophorbide-a, enable site-specific binding to receptors like , improving cellular uptake and PDT efficacy in HER2-positive cancers while sparing healthy tissue. Peptide-linked variants further enhance specificity by homing to tumor microenvironments. Emerging photosensitizers include BODIPY derivatives, which offer tunable photophysics without heavy atoms in some designs; iodinated BODIPYs achieve singlet oxygen s up to 0.93 and low IC_{50} values (e.g., 1–2 nM in various lines) through beta-substitution for . Cyanines provide NIR responsiveness and mitochondrial targeting for enhanced ROS in hypoxic tumors. Recent 2023-2025 advances in porphyrinoid nanoscale metal-organic frameworks (nMOFs), such as Cu-TBB (50-200 nm nanosheets), improve stability (retaining 73% post-irradiation) and PDT efficacy via coordinated ROS generation and GSH depletion in tumors. Synthesis strategies for these agents emphasize enhancements, including axial ligation to metal centers (e.g., methoxyethyleneglycol on phthalocyanines) to prevent aggregation and improve , and sulfonation of cores (e.g., in aluminum phthalocyanines) to confer water for intravenous delivery without carriers. These modifications maintain high photodynamic activity while optimizing .

Delivery and Enhancement Strategies

Nanotechnology Approaches

has revolutionized photodynamic therapy (PDT) by addressing key limitations of photosensitizers (PSs), such as poor solubility, aggregation, and limited tissue penetration, through engineered that facilitate targeted delivery and enhanced activation. These approaches leverage the unique physicochemical properties of nanoparticles to encapsulate hydrophobic PSs, exploit the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect for tumor accumulation, and enable deeper light penetration via energy transfer mechanisms. Liposomes and micelles represent foundational systems for PS solubilization in PDT. Pegylated liposomes, such as Visudyne®, encapsulate —a second-generation PS—to improve its aqueous , prolong circulation time, and reduce skin while enhancing tumor uptake via the EPR effect. These lipid-based vesicles, typically 100–200 nm in size, shield the PS from premature degradation and allow controlled release upon light activation. Similarly, polymeric micelles self-assemble to solubilize PSs like chlorins, minimizing aggregation and improving in systemic circulation. Quantum dots (QDs) and gold nanoparticles further advance PDT by enabling (FRET) for upconversion, which converts near-infrared (NIR) light—offering deeper tissue penetration (up to several centimeters)—into visible wavelengths suitable for PS excitation. QDs, such as graphene QDs conjugated to upconversion nanoparticles, facilitate efficient FRET to PSs like chlorin e6, boosting (ROS) generation in deep-seated tumors while providing capabilities. Gold nanoparticles, often surface-functionalized, enhance FRET efficiency by quenching donor fluorescence and transferring energy to PSs, as demonstrated in systems pairing gold cores with phthalocyanine derivatives for amplified PDT efficacy and . Recent advances from 2024–2025 highlight smart nanogels that respond to tumor microenvironmental cues for on-demand PS release. -responsive nanogels, exploiting the acidic extracellular (6.5–6.8) of tumors, swell and liberate PSs like aggregation-induced emission (AIE) luminogens or derivatives, enhancing localized ROS production. Temperature-sensitive nanogels, triggered by mild (40–42°C) from external sources or tumor metabolism, similarly control release, as seen in hyaluronic acid-poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) systems for PDT. Dual /temperature-responsive designs, such as those incorporating upconversion nanoparticles, further optimize spatiotemporal control. These platforms offer multifaceted benefits, including exploitation of the EPR effect for passive tumor targeting, suppression of PS aggregation to maintain quantum yields, and integration of multi-modal functions like imaging-guided PDT. For instance, silica nanoparticles loaded with chlorins (e.g., temoporfin or chlorin e6) provide high loading capacity and , demonstrating superior ROS generation and tumor regression in preclinical models compared to free PSs. Clinical trials, such as those evaluating liposomal formulations for solid tumors, report improved response rates and reduced systemic toxicity, paving the way for broader PDT adoption in .

Targeted Delivery Systems

Targeted delivery systems in photodynamic therapy (PDT) aim to enhance the specificity of (PS) accumulation at diseased sites, minimizing systemic exposure and improving therapeutic efficacy. These systems leverage biological interactions to direct PS molecules or PS-loaded carriers to target cells, such as tumor cells overexpressing specific receptors. By conjugating PS to targeting ligands or encapsulating them in nanocarriers that exploit physiological tumor characteristics, targeted delivery addresses limitations of free PS , which often results in suboptimal localization. Passive targeting relies on the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect, where leaky tumor vasculature and poor lymphatic drainage allow carrying PS to accumulate preferentially in solid tumors. This phenomenon facilitates higher PS concentrations in malignant tissues compared to normal ones, with nanoparticle sizes typically between 10-200 nm optimizing . For instance, PS-loaded liposomes or polymeric have demonstrated up to 10-fold greater tumor uptake via EPR in preclinical models of and colorectal cancers. However, the EPR effect's variability across tumor types and patients limits its reliability, often necessitating complementary active strategies. Active targeting employs ligands that bind specific molecular markers on target cells, enabling precise PS delivery. Antibody-PS conjugates represent a prominent approach, particularly for receptor-overexpressing tumors. , a against (EGFR), conjugated to porphyrin-based PS has shown selective binding to EGFR-positive cells, enhancing PDT cytotoxicity in head and neck models by up to 5-fold compared to non-targeted PS. This conjugate inhibits EGFR signaling while localizing PS for light-activated ROS generation, reducing off-target damage. Folate receptor-mediated targeting exploits the overexpression of receptors on many cancer cells, such as those in ovarian and tumors. PS linked to folic acid, like pyropheophorbide-a conjugates, bind these receptors with high affinity (Kd ~1 nM), promoting and intracellular PS accumulation. studies with folate-PS conjugates have reported 3-4 times higher PDT efficacy in folate receptor-positive cells versus receptor-negative ones, with reduced in healthy tissues. Recent advances from 2024-2025 have introduced more sophisticated conjugates for enhanced precision. Peptide-targeted nanoscale metal-organic frameworks (nMOFs), such as those modified with cell-penetrating peptides like CPP10, enable dual targeting and photoactivation, achieving tumor suppression rates exceeding 80% in gastric cancer models through combined PDT and . Aptamer-PS conjugates, utilizing ligands for high specificity, have similarly improved delivery; for example, a tumor-specific conjugate delivering Ce6 and has demonstrated significant tumor regression in orthotopic models with minimal systemic toxicity. These developments highlight the shift toward multifunctional, biocompatible systems for clinical translation. Despite these progresses, targeted delivery systems face significant challenges, including off-target effects from non-specific binding or PS leakage, which can lead to unintended ROS generation in healthy tissues. of conjugates, particularly antibody-based ones, poses another hurdle, potentially eliciting anti-drug antibodies that reduce efficacy and cause reactions in up to 20% of patients in early trials. Ongoing research focuses on engineering and stealth coatings to mitigate these issues while preserving targeting efficiency.

Combination Therapies

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is often integrated with other therapeutic modalities to achieve synergistic effects, enhancing efficacy against resistant tumors by addressing limitations such as hypoxia, , and immune evasion. These combinations leverage PDT's ability to generate (ROS) upon light activation to amplify the mechanisms of complementary treatments, leading to improved tumor and reduced recurrence rates. In combinations with chemotherapy, PDT facilitates targeted drug release and overcomes multidrug resistance. For instance, photosensitizers conjugated with enable light-triggered release, where ROS generation disrupts endosomal membranes and enhances intracellular drug accumulation, resulting in heightened in preclinical models of cervical and cancers. Systematic reviews of such approaches in cells demonstrate synergistic antitumor effects, with combination indices indicating potentiation over monotherapy, though clinical translation remains limited to early-phase trials. PDT combined with , particularly through photoimmunotherapy (PIT), utilizes antibody-IR700 conjugates to selectively target cancer cells and stimulate immune responses. The IR700 dye, activated by 690 nm near-infrared light, induces rapid membrane damage and immunogenic cell death, releasing damage-associated molecular patterns like ATP and that activate dendritic cells and prime CD8+ T-cell responses against tumors. This approach has shown promise in preclinical models of head and neck and breast cancers, with clinical approval in in 2020 for EGFR-targeted PIT (ASP-1929) in inoperable head and neck , where phase I/II trials reported tumor shrinkage in over 50% of patients. Integration of PDT with radiotherapy addresses tumor hypoxia, a major barrier to both therapies, by generating oxygen to enhance . Nanoparticles like W18O49@EP, under near-infrared light, produce ROS that convert to oxygen , reducing hypoxia-inducible factor-1α expression and alleviating the oxygen-consuming effects of PDT itself. studies on models demonstrate that this triple combination significantly inhibits tumor growth, achieving near-complete regression in mice after two weeks, with minimal systemic toxicity compared to standalone radiotherapy or PDT. Recent advancements as of 2025 emphasize PDT-mediated activation alongside checkpoint inhibitors to boost . Light-activated prodrugs, triggered by PDT-generated ROS, enable precise release of chemotherapeutic agents via cleavable linkers like thioketals, inducing immunogenic that synergizes with PD-1/ inhibitors to enhance T-cell infiltration and tumor clearance. Preclinical evaluations, such as those using glycosylated aggregation-induced emission photocages, report amplified ROS production and improved response rates in solid tumors, with ongoing phase I trials exploring this for colorectal and hepatocellular carcinomas. Vascular targeting in PDT focuses on anti-angiogenic effects to disrupt tumor blood supply. Vascular-targeted PDT employs photosensitizers like TOOKAD® or conjugates such as SnChe6-SIP(L19) to induce vessel occlusion through formation and endothelial damage, leading to rapid hypoxia and within millimeters of the light source. Approved in and for low-risk , this strategy has demonstrated complete tumor regression in preclinical models of colon and teratocarcinoma, with molecular targeting of receptors like αvβ3 further enhancing selectivity and reducing off-target effects.

Clinical Applications

Cancer Treatment

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is widely applied in for tumor through direct , where photosensitizers activated by light generate that induce in targeted cancer tissues. This approach is particularly effective for superficial or accessible tumors, such as those in the skin, , and lungs, due to the localized nature of light delivery. In cancers, including and , PDT achieves high response rates by selectively destroying malignant cells while preserving surrounding healthy tissue. For instance, topical application of 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) followed by red light illumination has demonstrated complete clearance in over 80% of superficial lesions. In , PDT serves as a palliative treatment for obstructing tumors, with porfimer sodium (Photofrin) receiving FDA approval in 1995 for completely or partially obstructing cases unsuitable for other interventions. Clinical studies report complete response rates of up to 87% at six months post-treatment, enabling relief and improved . Similarly, for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly microinvasive endobronchial tumors, Photofrin-based PDT was FDA-approved in 1998, yielding complete responses in approximately 94% of cases and facilitating airway deobstruction without systemic toxicity. Long-term outcomes in these applications include median survival exceeding 75 months in select cohorts. Photoimmunotherapy represents an advanced PDT variant, utilizing near-infrared photoimmunoconjugates like IR700 linked to antibodies targeting tumor-specific antigens, such as HER2 in . This approach enhances specificity by binding to HER2-positive cells, followed by near-infrared light activation to trigger rapid immunogenic . Preclinical and early-phase studies in HER2+ models demonstrate potent cytotoxicity and potential to overcome trastuzumab resistance, with ongoing clinical trials as of 2025 evaluating safety and efficacy in advanced cases. and models show tumor regression rates exceeding 90% upon conjugate administration and illumination. Vascular-targeted PDT disrupts tumor blood supply by selectively damaging endothelial cells in neovasculature, amplifying ischemic in solid tumors. In , padeliporfin (WST11 or Tookad)-mediated vascular PDT (marketed as Stakel in the EU since 2017) has shown promise in low-risk localized disease, achieving absence of clinically significant cancer in 89% of treated lobes at 6 months in a phase II trial and 49% negative biopsies at 24 months in the phase III PCM301 trial, with 5-year data indicating sustained cancer control and minimal side effects, though it was not approved by the FDA following a 2020 advisory committee recommendation against it. For head and neck cancers, vascular-targeted strategies, often combined with standard PDT, target aberrant tumor vessels to enhance overall response, with studies reporting improved locoregional control in squamous cell carcinomas. This modality is particularly suited for tumors with prominent vascularization, such as those in the oral cavity or . PDT offers key advantages in cancer treatment, including its minimally invasive profile, repeatability without cumulative toxicity like radiation, and precise spatiotemporal control via light dosimetry, making it ideal for patients unfit for surgery. It avoids scarring and preserves organ function, as seen in endoscopic applications for esophageal and lung tumors. However, limitations include restricted penetration of activating light to superficial depths (typically <1 cm), confining its use to early-stage or accessible lesions and necessitating adjuncts like fiber optics for deeper sites. Outcomes underscore its efficacy in early-stage cancers; for instance, 5-year tumor-free survival rates reach approximately 78-80% in non-melanoma skin cancers treated with ALA-PDT.

Dermatological Conditions

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has emerged as a versatile treatment for various dermatological conditions, particularly those involving inflammatory, precancerous, or infectious skin lesions, by leveraging photosensitizers to target abnormal cells with minimal systemic side effects. In dermatology, PDT typically employs topical application of precursors like 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA), which is metabolized into protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) in the skin, followed by illumination to induce selective photodamage. This approach is especially valued for its precision in treating superficial skin disorders, allowing for outpatient procedures with high patient tolerance. For acne vulgaris, ALA-PDT effectively reduces the population of Propionibacterium acnes bacteria and associated inflammation by generating that disrupt bacterial cell walls and activity. Standard protocols involve applying 20% ALA cream for 1-3 hours before exposure to blue light at approximately 410 nm for 10-20 minutes, often repeated weekly for 4-8 sessions, leading to significant lesion reduction in 70-90% of patients. Clinical studies have demonstrated sustained improvements in acne severity scores, with minimal scarring compared to traditional therapies like . In the management of , a caused by chronic sun exposure, topical ALA or methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) is applied under occlusion for 3-5 hours prior to red light illumination at 570-670 nm, achieving complete clearance rates exceeding 80% in treated lesions after 1-3 sessions. This method is particularly effective for on the face and scalp, where multiple lesions are present, and offers superior cosmetic outcomes over or surgical excision by preserving surrounding healthy tissue. Long-term follow-up data indicate recurrence rates below 20% at one year, underscoring PDT's role in preventing progression to . PDT has also shown promise for other dermatological issues, such as , where ALA-PDT combined with reduces plaque thickness and scaling by modulating immune responses in the , and viral , which respond to daylight-mediated ALA-PDT with clearance in up to 70% of cases after multiple applications. Pain during illumination, a common challenge, is often mitigated through pre-treatment with cooling agents or topical anesthetics, enhancing comfort without compromising . Key advantages of PDT in include its non-scarring nature, which preserves skin texture and pigmentation, and excellent cosmetic results, making it ideal for visible areas like the face. Additionally, as of 2025, advancements in LED-based home devices have enabled self-administered PDT for mild and , using portable blue or red light sources with pre-packaged ALA formulations, thereby improving accessibility and compliance for early-stage conditions.

Ophthalmological Uses

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been primarily utilized in for the treatment of wet age-related (), a condition characterized by the growth of abnormal (CNV) that leads to leakage and vision loss. In this application, , a second-generation , is activated by a to selectively close these aberrant vessels while sparing overlying tissue. This approach was established as a standard treatment following the pivotal Treatment of Age-related macular degeneration with Photodynamic therapy (TAP) study, which demonstrated that verteporfin PDT reduced the risk of moderate or severe vision loss by approximately 70% compared to at one year, with 67% of treated eyes losing fewer than 15 letters on the Early Treatment Study (ETDRS) chart versus 39% in the control group. However, with the advent of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies in the early , PDT's diminished as monotherapy, though it remains relevant in regimens for cases. The standard protocol involves intravenous administration of at a dose of 6 mg/m² over 10 minutes, followed by a 5-minute wait and then diode activation at 689 nm to achieve deep tissue penetration to the . To mitigate side effects such as choroidal nonperfusion and , reduced-dose regimens using half the standard amount (3 mg/m²) have been adopted, showing comparable efficacy with fewer adverse events in clinical practice. PDT is also applied to other forms of CNV, including those associated with pathologic myopia (myopic degeneration), where it similarly targets neovascular lesions; the in Photodynamic Therapy (VIP) trial confirmed its benefit in this , with 64% of treated myopic CNV eyes stabilizing or improving vision (losing fewer than 8 letters) at two years compared to 49% in the group. Clinical outcomes for wet AMD indicate vision stabilization in 60-70% of cases, as evidenced by long-term follow-up from the TAP study where 59% of eyes maintained vision (losing <15 letters) at two years versus 31% with . Combination therapy with agents, such as or , further enhances these results by addressing both vascular closure and ongoing leakage, with studies showing sustained vision preservation in up to 80% of patients over multiple years. Despite these benefits, limitations include the risk of treatment-induced , requiring patients to avoid direct and strong indoor lights for 48 hours post-infusion to prevent ocular or cutaneous burns, as well as potential complications like subretinal hemorrhage.

Antimicrobial Applications

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has emerged as a promising strategy, leveraging light-activated photosensitizers to generate (ROS) that target pathogens without promoting resistance. In applications, PDT disrupts microbial cell membranes through oxidative damage caused by ROS, such as and free radicals, leading to rapid inactivation of , viruses, and fungi. This mechanism avoids the selective pressure that drives resistance, as the multi-target oxidative attack does not rely on specific cellular pathways. Antibacterial PDT has shown particular efficacy against multidrug-resistant strains like methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and bacterial biofilms, which are notoriously difficult to eradicate with conventional antibiotics. Photosensitizers such as or toluidine blue, activated by red light (typically 630–660 nm), penetrate biofilms and induce over 99% reduction in viable bacteria and models. For instance, methylene blue-mediated PDT has eradicated MRSA in murine wound infections, achieving significant bacterial killing without recurrence due to the absence of resistance development. In antiviral applications, PDT effectively inactivates enveloped viruses in biological fluids, including products, by damaging viral envelopes and capsids via ROS. This approach has been used to neutralize HIV-1 and HIV-2 in plasma, achieving up to 100% inactivation without compromising component integrity, making it suitable for pathogen reduction in transfusions. Similarly, PDT with photosensitizers like fullerenes or has inactivated influenza virus in allantoic fluid and derivatives, reducing viral titers by more than 3 log10 and preventing . For , PDT accelerates recovery in chronic ulcers by reducing bacterial load while promoting tissue repair, offering a non-antibiotic alternative that circumvents resistance issues. In clinical studies, PDT applied to infected leg ulcers with photosensitizers like resulted in complete healing in many cases, with significant decreases in ulcer size and microbial viability compared to controls. This therapy enhances formation and epithelialization without adverse effects, particularly beneficial for diabetic or venous ulcers harboring biofilms. As of 2025, advances in have enhanced PDT for targeted uses, such as nanoparticle-encapsulated s for oral and gut infections. Curcumin-loaded nanoparticles combined with PDT have demonstrated efficacy against oral bacterial pathogens like Porphyromonas gingivalis in periodontal models, achieving deep tissue penetration and synergistic killing. For gut applications, nanoparticle-based PDT systems are exploring inactivation of Helicobacter pylori biofilms, reducing infection burdens in preclinical gastric models with minimal off-target effects. These innovations improve delivery to inaccessible sites, broadening PDT's utility in microbiome-related infections.

History and Future Directions

Historical Development

The earliest indications of light-based therapies date back more than 3000 years, with descriptions in ancient of using in combination with sensitizing agents, though these practices are speculative and not definitively linked to modern photodynamic mechanisms. The foundational experiments of photodynamic therapy (PDT) emerged in the early . In 1900, medical student Oscar Raab, working under Hermann von Tappeiner at the University of , observed that paramecia exposed to were rapidly killed in the presence of but survived in the dark, marking the first demonstration of a photodynamic effect. Building on this, von Tappeiner and his colleague Alois Jesionek conducted the initial clinical trials in 1903, treating two patients with skin cancers using topical as a activated by , achieving tumor regression in one case without significant side effects. These studies established the core principle of PDT: the interaction of a photosensitizing agent, , and oxygen to produce cytotoxic effects. During the 1920s and 1940s, research shifted toward porphyrin-based photosensitizers, which showed greater promise for tumor targeting. In 1911, Walter Hausmann investigated hematoporphyrin, demonstrating its phototoxic effects on paramecia and red blood cells upon light exposure, confirming oxygen's role in the reaction. Later, in the 1940s, Friedrich Figge and colleagues at explored hematoporphyrin's tumor-localizing properties in animal models, observing selective accumulation in malignant tissues after intravenous administration, which laid the groundwork for PDT's diagnostic and therapeutic potential. These hematoporphyrin studies represented early first-generation photosensitizers, though clinical translation remained limited due to inconsistent purification and delivery. Advancements accelerated in the 1960s and 1970s with refined photosensitizer formulations. In 1961, Richard Lipson and Edward Baldes at the developed hematoporphyrin derivative (HpD), a purified mixture of oligomers, which exhibited enhanced tumor for detection; this enabled endoscopic visualization of early malignancies in human patients. HpD's improved tumor affinity spurred interest in therapeutic applications, transitioning PDT from diagnostics to treatment. Key clinical milestones followed in the mid-1970s. In 1975, Thomas Dougherty and colleagues at Roswell Park Memorial Institute reported the first successful photodynamic destruction of tumors in animal models using HpD and laser light, achieving complete remissions in over 90% of cases and demonstrating PDT's efficacy against accessible cancers. This preclinical success led to initial human applications shortly thereafter. By 1993, porfimer sodium (Photofrin), a purified form of HpD, received regulatory approval in for PDT treatment of , marking the first commercial endorsement of the therapy and validating decades of foundational research.

Recent Advances and Challenges

Recent advances in photodynamic therapy (PDT) have focused on integrating to enhance (PS) delivery and efficacy, particularly from 2023 to 2025. Nano-enhanced PDT systems, such as those using liposomes or polymeric nanoparticles, improve PS solubility, tumor accumulation, and (ROS) generation, leading to higher therapeutic indices in preclinical models. For instance, graphene quantum dots have addressed limitations like low , enabling deeper tissue penetration and reduced off-target effects in cancer applications. Photoimmunotherapy (PIT), a targeted variant of PDT, achieved a regulatory breakthrough with the approval of ASP-1929 in in 2020 under the Conditional Early Approval System, marking the first global authorization for this modality in recurrent . This antibody-PS conjugate selectively binds tumor cells, and upon near-infrared light activation, induces rapid while minimizing damage to surrounding tissues, with ongoing U.S. Phase 3 trials showing promising survival benefits when combined with checkpoint inhibitors. Prodrug-light activation strategies have emerged as a key innovation, particularly when paired with immunotherapy, to overcome tumor microenvironment barriers. In 2025 studies, hypoxia-responsive prodrug PS systems, such as HTPS-Niclo, were activated under low-oxygen conditions to generate ROS and release immunomodulatory agents, enhancing tumor inhibition from 75% to over 90% in murine models and extending survival through immune cell recruitment. These approaches amplify immunogenic cell death, synergizing with PD-1 inhibitors for abscopal effects in metastatic settings. Emerging developments include activatable PS that remain dormant until triggered by tumor-specific stimuli, reducing systemic toxicity. Recent designs, like bioorthogonally activatable PS reported in 2025, enable precise ON/OFF switching via enzymatic or pH changes, improving selectivity in photodynamic antitumor responses. Multi-modal nano-systems combining PDT with chemotherapy or photothermal therapy have shown potential for brain tumors, where gold nanoparticle-PS conjugates cross the blood-brain barrier and achieve approximately 46% apoptotic cell death in glioma cells in vitro by enhancing ROS and heat synergy. Despite these progresses, PDT faces significant challenges in clinical translation. Standardization of light dosimetry remains critical, as variations in fluence and lead to inconsistent ROS production and efficacy across tissues, with ongoing efforts to develop AI-assisted protocols for real-time adjustments. Overcoming hypoxia, a common tumor feature that quenches ROS, is another hurdle; strategies like oxygen-generating nanoparticles have improved outcomes but require further validation in hypoxic models. Additionally, high costs of PS and specialized equipment limit accessibility in low-resource areas, where low-cost LED-based systems are being explored to enable point-of-care applications. Looking to the future, AI-optimized protocols promise personalized by analyzing patient-specific imaging and , potentially increasing PDT success rates by 20-30% in simulations. Expansion into non-oncology fields, such as , is underway, with PS targeting plaque macrophages to induce and stabilize lesions, reducing neovascularization in preclinical rabbit models. For instance, the PhotoPoint PDT system has demonstrated promotion of atherosclerotic plaque stabilization and inhibition of plaque progression in preclinical studies. Recent research includes chemiluminescent nanoparticles coated with platelet membranes for targeted PDT, which reduce plaque burden by 62.3% and decrease inflammatory factors in mouse models of atherosclerosis. Additionally, MRI monitoring of PDT-treated plaques shows significant changes in T1 and T2 relaxation times, indicating effective alteration of plaque properties. Regulatory milestones include the positive Phase 3 results for Cevira (APL-1702) in 2024 for high-grade , demonstrating 41.1% responder rate versus 21.7% , with NDA review ongoing in as of 2025. These advancements underscore PDT's evolving role, balanced against needs for broader validation and equitable access.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.