Figure 6 PIT efficacy in 3D tumors. (A) Dose-dependent change in normalized viable tumor area in static 3D cultures treated with PIC (1 μM BPD equivalent) and increasing energy densities (10–50 J/cm2 @ 50 mW/cm2). Significant tumoricidal efficacy is observed in a light-dose-dependent manner, starting at 15 J/cm2. (One-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post hoc test; n.s., not significant; ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, N = 9) (B) Comparison of cytotoxic response in PIT-treated 3D cultures under static and flow conditions. For quantitative analysis of fluorescence images, a minimum nodule size cut-off of 2000 µm2 (clusters of ~15–20 cells) was used to establish normalized viable tumor area. PIT is equally effective in 3D tumors grown in static cultures (green) and under flow-induced shear stress (blue) (in contrast to flow-induced chemo-resistance shown in Figure 4) (Two-tailed t test; n.s., not significant; N = 9).

Figure 6
PIT efficacy in 3D tumors. (A) Dose-dependent change in normalized viable tumor area in static 3D cultures treated with PIC (1 μM BPD equivalent) and increasing energy densities (10–50 J/cm2 @ 50 mW/cm2). Significant tumoricidal efficacy is observed in a light-dose-dependent manner, starting at 15 J/cm2. (One-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post hoc test; n.s., not significant; ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, N = 9) (B) Comparison of cytotoxic response in PIT-treated 3D cultures under static and flow conditions. For quantitative analysis of fluorescence images, a minimum nodule size cut-off of 2000 µm2 (clusters of ~15–20 cells) was used to establish normalized viable tumor area. PIT is equally effective in 3D tumors grown in static cultures (green) and under flow-induced shear stress (blue) (in contrast to flow-induced chemo-resistance shown in Figure 4) (Two-tailed t test; n.s., not significant; N = 9).