Effects induced by a 50 Hz electromagnetic field and doxorubicin on Walker-256 carcinosarcoma growth and hepatic redox state in rats

Figures & data

Figure 1. Animal positioning for extremely low-frequency electromagnetic irradiation (a): 1 – apparatus; 2 – rat position. Intratumoral temperature measurements (b): 3 – fiber-optic sensor, 4 – thermometer

Figure 2. Distribution of electromagnetic fields on the apparatus surface: (a) electric field; (b) magnetic field

Table 1. Walker-256 carcinosarcoma growth on day 15 after implantation (M ± m)

Animal group	Tumor growth φ, day^–1
No treatment tumor	0.73 ± 0.02
DOX	0.45 ± 0.06^1
DOX + EMF	0.49 ± 0.04^1
EMF	0.60 ± 0.09^123

¹Statistically significant difference from no treatment tumor, p< .05;

²Statistically significant difference from DOX, p< .05;

³Statistically significant difference from DOX + EMF, p< .05.

Figure 3. The growth kinetics of Walker-256 carcinosarcoma (M ± m): 1 – no treatment; 2 – DOX; 3 – DOX + EMF; 4 – EMF

Figure 4. Changes in body weight of control and Walker-256 carcinosarcoma-bearing rats relative to day 3 after tumor implantation: a – control; b – no treatment tumor; c – DOX; d – DOX + EMF; e – EMF

Figure 5. Overall survival of Walker-256 carcinosarcoma-bearing rats 20 days after tumor implantation: 1 – no treatment; 2 – DOX; 3 – DOX + EMF; 4 – EMF

* Statistically significant difference from no-treatment tumor, p < .05.

Table 2. Tumor growth on 15th day after Walker-256 carcinosarcoma implantation (M ± m)

Histological findings	Animal group
	No treatment	DOX	DOX + EMF	EMF
Necrosis	+	+++	+++	++
Apoptosis	-	-	+	+++
Structural heterogeneity, arb. unit	40.7 ± 2	36.6 ± 1.8	24.0 ± 1.2	22.6 ± 1.1

The level of pronunciation: “-“ not pronounced; “+” low pronounced; “++” moderate pronounced; “+++” high pronounced.

Figure 6. Histological findings in Walker-256 carcinosarcoma. H&E stain. (a) no-treatment group: sarcomatous (sc), carcinomatous (cc) components, fibrotic tissue (f) and interstitial edema (arrow), magnification x100; (b) DOX treatment: sarcomatous (sc), epithelioid (ec) components, fibrotic tissue (f) and necrosis of tumor cells (n), magnification x200; (c) DOX + EMF treatment: necrosis (n) and apoptosis (a) of tumor cells with extracellular matrix (m), magnification x400; (d) EMF: apoptosis of tumor cells (a) and pseudo-granular structures (arrows) magnification x400

Table 3. Histological findings in the liver of Walker-256 carcinosarcoma-bearing rats

Histological findings	Animal group
	No treatment	DOX	DOX + EMF	EMF
Hepatocyte hypertrophy	++	++	++	+
Empty nuclei	-	+	-	-
Ground-glass hepatocytes	++	+	+++	+++
Biliary hyperplasia	++	+	+++	-
Neutrophil infiltration	-	++	+	+
Asymmetry parameter, arb. unit	0.58 ± 0.03	0.45 ± 0.02	0.18 ± 0.01	0.19 ± 0.01

The level of pronunciation: “-“not pronounced; “+” low or mild pronounced; “++” moderate pronounced; “+++” high pronounced.

Figure 7. Histological findings in the liver of Walker-256 carcinosarcoma-bearing animals. H&E stain. (a) no treatment; (b) DOX; (c) DOX + EMF; (d) EMF: neutrophil infiltration (ni), hepatocytes with empty nuclei (Eh), hepatocyte hypertrophy (h), ground-glass hepatocytes (gh), biliary hyperplasia (e), magnification x400

Figure 8. Hepatic antioxidant parameters: (a) TBARS, (b) SOD, (c) CAT, (d) GSH in 1 – control, 2 – no treatment, 3 – DOX, 4 – DOX + EMF, 5 – EMF groups.^&Statistically significant difference from control (no tumor), p < .05;*Statistically significant difference from no-treatment, p < .05;⁺Statistically significant difference from DOX, p < .05

Figure 9. Serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) activities: control group with no tumor (1), Walker-256 carcinosarcoma-bearing animals receiving no treatment (2), DOX (3), DOX + EMF (4), EMF (5).^&Statistically significant difference from control without tumor, p < .05;*Statistically significant difference from control no-treatment with the tumor, p < .05,⁺Statistically significant difference from tumor rats treated with conventional DOX, p < .05