Thursday, March 29, 2012

PDT for Cancer Depends on Improved Photosensitizers

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is proving to be a more than viable option for cancer treatment. Compared with other treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy, PDT is more selective, causing far less damage to healthy cells near cancerous targets due to the precise way in which photosensitizers can locate and infiltrate tumor cells.

The task remains to find the best combinations of photosensitizers and conjugates to propel the technique past chemotherapy and other traditional methods.

Basically, a photoreactive chemical compound called a photosensitizer is introduced into a patient, where it aggregates near an active tumor site. A clinician then shines light from a diode laser or LED source onto the tumor region. The light, which has a specific wavelength, activates the photosensitizer without affecting surrounding healthy tissue. Once activated, the photosensitizer transfers some of its energy to nearby ground-state molecular oxygen, producing excited singlet oxygen. The result is oxidation of tumor cells in the site, destroying the cancer while harming as few of the adjacent healthy cells as possible.

Bringing light to the site is an ongoing issue. Early studies of PDT focused on skin cancers, such as various types of melanoma, because it was easier to shine near-infrared wavelengths a couple of millimeters through the skin’s surface to the tumor site. This drove design of the first photosensitizers to favor compounds that would preferentially react to light in that range. More recently, advances in endoscopic light-delivery systems have made deeper tumors easier to reach and have broadened the range of potential wavelengths and matching photosensitizers.

Different compounds are now used as photosensitizers, including phthalocyanine, chlorine, bacteriochlorin and porphyrin. None, however, is a perfect candidate.

Getting a photosensitizer to find and attach itself to a tumor cell is a major battle. The body’s immune system, for example, seeks out and annihilates some forms of photosensitizers, reducing the effectiveness of the overall treatment. Adding antibodies to photosensitizers can help their affinity for cancer cells, but some researchers feel that protecting them with shells composed of lipoproteins is a better way to go. Lipoproteins not only help their cargo locate and infiltrate tumors, but also help protect them from enzymes and macrophages that might alter or destroy them before they even arrive at the treatment site.

Gold nanoparticles and liposomes also have been considered as adjuncts that could help photosensitizers directly enter cancer cells.

Gold rush

Researchers at Rhodes University in Grahamstown and in the biophotonics department of the National Laser Center in Pretoria, both in South Africa, are among the groups looking at the possible improvements to photosensitizer action provided by gold nanoparticles.

Tebello Nyokong of Rhodes University and her colleagues had gold nanoparticles in mind during efficiency tests of a particular photosensitizer, as they reported in the Feb. 6 issue of the Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology.

Phthalocyanine compounds strongly absorb in the 600- to 800-nm range, yet tissues are transparent to a useful degree to these wavelengths. The result is an ability to reach deeply into tissue and provide sufficient energy to the photosensitizer to activate it.

Several attributes must be considered when designing a photosensitizer, said Nyokong, director of the Nanotechnology Innovation Center at Rhodes. One is that it should have a high specificity for cancer, which is achieved through inclusion and coordination of molecules such as folic acid and vitamin B12. Another highly valued attribute is good absorption in the red wavelengths, which is aided by sulfur linkages in the photosensitizer compound. The final product also should be water-soluble and initiate large production of singlet oxygen, which drives tumor cell death.

The group’s candidate was [2,9,17,23-tetrakis-(1,6-hexanedithiol)phthalocyaninato]zinc(II), a second-generation phthalocyanine-based compound. Its target: human malignant breast cancer cells (MCF-7).

The researchers chose zinc over more typical sulfur in their compound because it enhances the production of singlet oxygen while being somewhat easier to assemble. After forming the phthalocyanine complexes, they introduced some to gold nanoparticles, which self-assembled with the compound. Others were bound to liposomes as a delivery vehicle.

Using a Shimadzu spectrophotometer, a Varian Inc. spectrofluorimeter, and a single-photon counter and diode laser made by PicoQuant GmbH, the investigators measured the absorption spectra, fluorescence excitation and fluorescence lifetimes of their photosensitizer in action against MCF-7. 

After determining that a light dose of 4.5 J/cm2 provided adequate intensity without harming nearby healthy cells, the researchers compared how well the gold nanoparticles and the liposomes aided the overall phototoxic effect.

They found that, after photoactivation of the two complexes, 60.1 percent of the tumor cells treated with nanoparticle-enhanced phthalocyanine remained viable, whereas the liposome-enhanced complexes fared much better with 51.9 percent cell viability.

Nyokong’s work with PDT is focused on synthesizing bifunctional agents – compounds that serve two functions, generally enhancing location and attachment to tumor cells. In her lab, the desired result is agents that combine the action of PDT and other treatments, such as hyperthermia (destroying tumors with applied heat, which increases the uptake of oxygen, thus accelerating cell destruction). 

Nyokong’s lab also is looking at combinations of chemotherapy and PDT via introduction of platinum to common photosensitizers. Next up for her group is the ongoing search for water-soluble phthalocyanine compounds that include liposomes. Better water solubility, the researchers say, should improve the ability of phthalocyanine to generate singlet oxygen inside cells.



Before and after images show the effect of a porphyrin-based photosensitizer that was carried into HeLa cells by a ruthenium-based, cube-shaped cage. Courtesy of the Journal of the American Chemical Society.

Cage death matches

Phthalocyanine- and porphyrin-based photosensitizers struggle to reach the tumor site because they are fairly poorly water soluble. Placing either type of complex inside the hydrophobic cavity of an otherwise water-soluble vessel designed to wend its way breezily toward target cancer cells is thought by several research groups potentially to improve the situation.

The tricky part is getting the vessel to unload its cargo upon arrival.

Another way to bring the photosensitizer to the cell is to wrap it inside an organometallic cage. This helps address the water-solubility issue while offering control of photosensitizer release, according to Bruno Therrien, an associate professor at the University of Neuchâtel in Switzerland.


Side and top views show 3-D models of prism-shaped (left) and cubic (right) “metalla-cages” designed to transport photosensitizers to tumor cells. Courtesy of the Journal of the American Chemical Society.


Therrien and his colleagues at the university and at Centre Hospitalier Vaudois in Lausanne, Switzerland, devised and tested two types of carrier vessels to ferry porphyrin to its target. One, in the form of a prism, locks the porphyrin tightly; the other, a cubelike structure, is a more flexible jacket. Both vessels are made with ruthenium-based compounds.

“Within the ‘metalla-prism,’ it’s a ship-in-the-bottle system – only breakage of the cage can release the guest,” Therrien said. “However, from the ‘metalla-cube,’ the porphyrin is free to go through one of the apertures without [breaking] the cage.”

With either vessel, the porphyrin remains unreactive to light and only becomes photosensitive once released.

The group studied the uptake of both vessel types and their cargo into HeLa cells, and then used a 488-nm laser made by Spectra-Physics at various doses to release, then activate, the porphyrin once the metalla-cages were inside the cell membranes.


Fluorescence micrographs of HeLa cells show how the photosensitizer chlorin e6 (top row) and a complex of chlorin e6 and poly-L-lysine (bottom row) accumulate inside HeLa cells after 10 min (left), 1 h (center) and 2 h (right). Note how the photosensitizer alone remains in the cytoplasm near the cell membrane, while the conjugated pair works its way from the inner wall to the cell nucleus. Courtesy of Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry.


Once released, porphyrin discharged from either cage performed well at generating singlet oxygen and thus destroying the HeLa cells. Interestingly, the porphyrin delivered via the cubelike metalla-cages packed more punch, requiring one-tenth the energy (0.2 J/cm2) to reach the threshold where half the cells are killed compared with the metalla-prism combo (2.1 J/cm2).

Both controlled release of the photosensitizer and its ultimate phototoxicity are important, according to Therrien. “Controlled release can eliminate side effects, such as skin photosensitivity after and during treatment, but the active treatment is phototoxicity, so you still need an efficient photosensitizer.”

The ultimate goal of Therrien and his colleagues is to be able to irradiate at a specific wavelength to break up the cage where and when it is desired and, after release, apply a second dose of light to activate the photosensitizer.

Location, location, location

One of the most troubling disadvantages of first- and second-generation photosensitizers, according to researchers at the Tokyo Institute of Technology, is that they do not locate cancer cells as well as they might. The more specifically diseased cells are targeted, the more healthier viable cells can remain. 

“(A) photosensitizer which shows high tumor localization shows low phototoxicity for normal tissue,” said Shun-Ichiro Ogura of the institute’s department of biomolecular engineering. “It is quite important for tumor therapy.”

But as importantly, the short lifetime of singlet oxygen (measured in no more than microseconds) means that the closer they are to the right target, the more damage they can do. Therefore, improving localization can improve PDT efficacy.

Some photosensitizers, such as porphyrin-based constructions, accumulate in a target cell’s plasma membrane. However, the nucleus is the place to be if you want maximum destructive impact. Ogura and his colleagues found that one possible way to get to the cell nucleus effectively is to combine the popular photosensitizer chlorin e6 with poly-L-lysine. By itself, chlorin e6 stays in the cytoplasm of the cell, but the conjugated pair ultimately travels to the nucleus. After subsequent light exposure, the complex offered high phototoxicity. The group presents its findings on the localization capabilities of several photosensitizer types in the February issue of Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Theralase Reports Cancer Therapy Breakthrough

Toronto, ON – March 28, 2012 - Theralase Technologies Inc. (TSXV: TLT) announced today that its anti-cancer Photo Dynamic Compound (PDC) technology was found to completely destroy  subcutaneous (under the skin) colon cancer tumours in a mouse model. Four weeks post treatment; the mice continue to be cancer free.

Dr. Arkady Mandel, Chief Scientific Officer of Theralase said, “In cancer treatment, destroying the tumour is half the battle, while the other half is preventing the cancer from recurring. These findings are important because they demonstrate that our leading drug candidate in combination with a specific dose of light can prevent the cancer from returning. Preventing cancer from recurring in animal models is an important benchmark in developing new cancer therapeutics aimed at prolonging life."

Roger Dumoulin-White, President and CEO of Theralase Inc. stated, "The achievement of this important milestone signifies that Theralase’s leading drug PDC candidate is effective in the destruction of cancer in a live animal model and can prevent the cancer from recurring. Theralase's PDC technology was able to completely destroy subcutaneous cancer in mice and allow them to live cancer free for up to 4 weeks. Mice not treated with our PDC technology did not survive even 2 weeks. Based on recent successes in our research, we are confident that Theralase is well positioned to expedite the required steps to initiate human trials in the near future.”

Theralase’s work in this area will be presented at an International Symposium on “Photodynamic Therapy and Photodiagnosis in Clinical Practice” conference in Brixton, Italy in October 2012.

The following summarizes the research conducted by Theralase scientists:
  • In early February, mice were injected under the skin with 350,000 colon cancer cells.
  • All tumours were allowed to grow until they reached 5 mm in size.
  • On February 21, 2012, half the mice were used as a control group where no therapy was administered, while the remaining animals became the treatment group and were administered an intratumour injection of Theralase’s lead PDC.
  • The PDC was allowed to distribute within the cancerous tumour for 4 hours.
  • The PDC was then activated by Theralase’s proprietary laser light protocol for 32 minutes.
  • After 24 hours, the tumours were no longer visible on the treated mice.
  • All mice were monitored and examined daily thereafter.
  • Tumours in the control mice grew to the maximum allowable size of 12 mm, as determined by the study protocol, and did not survive for longer than 2 weeks.
  • The mice treated with Theralase’s PDC technology continue to be cancer free four weeks post treatment.

Theralase has a growing portfolio of intellectual property patents protecting the Theralase PDC technology for many years. Theralase’s anti-cancer technology pipeline includes drug candidates, in various advanced stages of preclinical development thus preparing Theralase’s anti-cancer PDC technology the ability to enter human clinical trials as early as 2013.

About Theralase Technologies Inc.:
Theralase Technologies Inc. founded in 1995, designs, develops, manufactures and markets patented, superpulsed laser technology utilized in biostimulation and biodestruction applications. The technology is safe and effective in the treatment of chronic pain, neural muscular-skeletal conditions and wound healing. When combined with its patented, light-sensitive Photo Dynamic Compounds (PDCs), Theralase laser technology is able to specifically target and destroy cancers, bacteria and viruses, as well as microbial pathogens associated with food contamination. For further information please visit www.theralase.com, regulatory filings may be viewed by visiting www.sedar.com.  

This press release contains forward-looking statements which reflect the Company's current expectations regarding future events. The forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those projected herein. The Company disclaims any obligation to update these forward-looking statements.

Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchanges) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.


For More Information

Roger Dumoulin-White                                                                      
President & Chief Executive Officer                          
416-447-8455 ext. 225                                   
rwhite@theralase.com

Monday, March 26, 2012

Comparison of Class 3 vs Class 4 Lasers

Comparison of Class 3 vs Class 4 Lasers



Dear Costumers,

Please join us at our Comparison of Class 3 vs Class 4 Lasers webinar.

Best Regards,
Theralase Team 






Comparison of Class 3 vs Class 4 Lasers

Beloware a few items that will be covered in the Webinar:

Is more power better?
What is the correct therapeutic dose?
Optimal laser wavelength will be examined
Clinical and scientific research will be discussed 

Date & Time

Date: Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Time: 1:00 PM - 2:PM EDT


Spaceis limited.
Reserve your Webinar seat now at:

https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/369312378




Thursday, March 15, 2012

Young Arms and Curveballs: A Scientific Twist

For decades, it has been an article of faith for parents of young pitchers: Do not let them throw curveballs. The reason was simple. Contorting elbows — all in the service of ever more competitive baseball at ever younger ages — puts more strain on the joint than arms can handle. 


 Gene J. Puskar/Associated Press


Studies show curveballs aren't more harmful to youngsters. 


 But as the research into the biomechanics of pitching has evolved, the debate has grown more robust, and more perplexing. A recent major study shows curveballs pose no greater risk than that of other pitches. And many studies lately have shown that the greatest threat to young arms is not throwing curves but making too many pitches of any kind. 


 “Science is banging heads with intuition and gut instinct,” said Glenn Fleisig, the research director of the American Sports Medicine Institute, who has conducted studies on breaking balls and young arms since 1996. “For years, we told people that curveballs were bad. Then we set out to prove it. We did not prove curveballs are safe, but we could not prove they were dangerous.” 


 Like a pitcher and a catcher disagreeing on pitch selection, the opposing sides in the debate could not be more closely allied. Dr. James Andrews, the orthopedic surgeon to many athletes, is a founder of the American Sports Medicine Institute and has written with Fleisig some of the studies that have failed to prove that curveballs are hazardous to young arms. It has not stopped Andrews from challenging the results. 


 “What we found out in the lab is true,” Andrews said. “For pitchers with proper mechanics, the force of throwing a curveball is no greater than for a fastball. But that’s not what happens in reality on the baseball field. Many kids don’t have proper mechanics or enough neuromuscular control, or they are fatigued when throwing curveballs. Things break down. 


 “Those are the kids I’m seeing every day in my operating room.” 


 Little League Baseball imposed strict per-game pitch limits five years ago, but Andrews said he performed about seven times the number of arm operations on young pitchers that he did 15 years ago. 


 Last year, the findings of a study conducted on more than 1,300 pitchers from 8-year-olds to college students, were released by Little League Baseball, which had commissioned it with USA Baseball. Three University of North Carolina researchers surveyed the pitchers over five years, annually assessing multiple factors: number of innings pitched, kinds of pitches thrown, number of teams played for and any arm pain or injuries experienced. The answers were analyzed to judge which factors influenced injury risk. The test group included 410 Little League pitchers. 


 “There was no association between throwing curveballs and injuries or even arm pain,” said Johna Mihalik, who wrote the study. “It was surprising in a sense because of the conventional thinking about curveballs, but we were well aware that the studies by Dr. Andrews and Glenn Fleisig had come to similar conclusions. That’s what fueled our study.” 


 Stephen D. Keener, the president and chief executive of Little League International, said that deliberations among youth baseball leaders about banning, by rule, all breaking pitches had led to the commissioning of the study. When the findings did not link curveballs to injury, he said, Little League felt compelled to maintain the status quo. 


 “It doesn’t mean we’re advocating throwing breaking balls,” Keener said. “We don’t promote it. We just think it’s very difficult to regulate it out of the game, and there is no data to show that throwing breaking balls is at the root of arm injuries.” 


 Dr. Timothy Kremchek, an Ohio orthopedic surgeon who is the Cincinnati Reds’ physician and whose practice frequently treats youth pitchers, called Little League’s stance irresponsible. 


 “They have an obligation to protect these 12-year-old kids and instead, they’re saying, ‘There’s no scientific evidence curveballs cause damage, so go ahead, kids, just keep throwing them,’ ” Kremchek said. “It makes me sick to my stomach to watch the Little League World Series and see 12-year-olds throwing curve after curve. Those of us who have to treat those kids a few years later, we’re pretty sure there is a cause and effect.” 


 Kremchek said he performed 150 elbow ligament reconstructions a year, a complex operation named after the former major league pitcher Tommy John, who had the surgery when it was developed in the 1970s.



“Seventy percent of those surgeries are pitchers who haven’t hit college yet,” Kremchek said. “I ask each one the same question: when did you start throwing curveballs? And they say: ‘I was 10. I was 11.’ Sometimes, it’s 9.” 

Karena Cawthon for The New York Times


Dr. James Andrews says he performs more arm surgeries now than he did 15 years ago. 


 Kremchek coaxed about eight Ohio youth leagues to prohibit breaking pitches. The umpire issues a warning the first time he suspects a pitcher has thrown a curveball, slider or other breaking pitch. A second offense means the player must stop pitching. 


 “The mothers in those leagues are the biggest fans of those rules,” Kremchek said. “It’s not a hard call for the umpires. A 12-year-old trying to throw a breaking ball is pretty demonstrative as he does it. You can tell.” 


 But Keener said that rule, if enacted by Little League, would be hard to enforce across its more than 7,000 leagues. 


 “I applaud people for trying to do it,” Keener said. “But we often have volunteer umpires in a Little League trying to make balls-and-strikes calls and basepath calls, and it would be a very hard thing to ask them to also decide if a pitcher intentionally tried to throw a breaking pitch. What if that pitcher just has natural movement on his fastball?” 


 One aspect of the curveball debate, and the studies it has spawned, that everyone agrees on is that throwing too many pitches of any type is the biggest danger. 


 As surprised as Mihalik might have been about her study’s findings on curveballs, what alarmed her most was the number of pitches thrown. 


 “So many were playing for three teams at once,” she said. “And the data was extremely clear that overuse led to injury more than any other factor.” 


 That, too, is consistent with the findings of more than 15 years of research at the American Sports Medicine Institute, and similar studies around the country. 


 “Maybe asking whether the curveball is safe is the wrong question,” Fleisig said. “Maybe the question should shift to this: Are you overdoing it? Because there is no question, scientifically or anecdotally, that too much throwing leads to injury, and often it’s serious injury.” 


 Little League instituted pitch limits based on research conducted by Andrews and Fleisig. This season, the limits are 85 pitches a day for 11- to 12-year-olds and 75 pitches for 9- to 10-year-olds. Rules also mandate days off between pitching appearances. Other recommendations by Andrews, who is on Little League’s board, and Fleisig, who acts as a Little League adviser, include a break of months from overhand throwing and competitive pitching, a 100-inning annual limit, avoiding radar guns and barring pitchers from playing catcher. 


 In 2007, the first year of the Little League pitch restrictions, Tyler Richards and Kyle Cotcamp logged many innings as their Hamilton, Ohio, team reached the World Series. They also pitched for a travel team. 


 Two years later, Richards had Tommy John surgery. Kremchek performed the operation, as he did for Cotcamp last year. 


 “I just pitched way too much,” said Richards, now a high school junior who has resumed pitching. 


 He added: “I should have just said no. I should have rested my arm.”

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Theralase Identifies Leading Anti-Cancer Drug Candidate

Pivotal Milestone Achieved – Theralase Advances Towards FDA Clinical Approval

Toronto, ON – March 14, 2012 - Theralase Technologies Inc. (TSXV: TLT) announced today that it is pursuing FDA Phase 1 approval for its patented Photo Dynamic Compounds (PDCs).

Theralase has successfully identified the leading drug candidate, which will be used for safety and efficacy clinical testing in human cancer patients. In multiple preclinical studies, the leading drug candidate has been selected from Theralase’s library of PDCs and has repeatedly demonstrated:
  • extremely high efficacy, virtually 100% kill rate, in various cancer cell lines including brain and colorectal cancers
  • robust destruction of sub cutaneous (under the skin) cancerous tumours in animals
  • extremely low toxicity
  • high stability, allowing for a long shelf life

The preclinical results have been reviewed by SPIE (The International Society for Optics and Photonics) and were accepted by the Conference Chairs for presentation at the SPIE Photonics Europe conference slated for April, 2012 in Brussels, Belgium.

Theralase will validate its extensive data with additional cancer animal models and toxicology analyses. This will provide the results required by the FDA to design a FDA Phase 1 clinical human study to commence in 2013 with scheduled completion in 2014.

Roger Dumoulin-White, President and CEO of Theralase Inc. stated, "Achievement of this critical milestone represents irrefutable proof that the Theralase leading drug PDC candidate is effective in the destruction of cancer in live animal models. The treatment was well tolerated by the animals, eliminating their cancer without any adverse effects. The Theralase leading drug candidate has been proven to be superior to any currently approved FDA PDC drug on the market, tested in our lab.”


About Theralase Technologies Inc.
Theralase Technologies Inc. founded in 1995, designs, develops, manufactures and markets patented, superpulsed laser technology utilized in biostimulation and biodestruction applications. The technology is safe and effective in the treatment of chronic pain, neural muscular-skeletal conditions and wound healing. When combined with its patented, light-sensitive Photo Dynamic Compounds (PDCs), Theralase laser technology is able to specifically target and destroy cancers, bacteria and viruses, as well as microbial pathogens associated with food contamination. For further information please visit www.theralase.com, regulatory filings may be viewed by visiting www.sedar.com.  

This press release contains forward-looking statements which reflect the Company's current expectations regarding future events. The forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those projected herein. The Company disclaims any obligation to update these forward-looking statements.

Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchanges) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.


For More Information

Roger Dumoulin-White                                                                      
President & Chief Executive Officer                         
416-447-8455 ext. 225                                   
rwhite@theralase.com                                   

Kristina Hachey
Chief Financial Officer
416-447-8455 ext. 224

Dr. Arkady Mandel
Chief Scientific Officer
416-447-8455 ext. 242
amandel@theralase.com                  

Greg Bewsh
Director of Investor Relations,
416-447-8455 ext. 262

Monday, March 12, 2012

The OxyContin Switch - The Lost Battle on the War on Pain


OxyContin, a powerful painkiller, disappeared from Canada on March 1. It was replaced by OxyNEO, a chemically identical, but tamper-resistant version. The anger, confusion and physical pain that has resulted from this seemingly benign upgrade speaks volumes about what’s wrong with our approach to drugs in this country
We pay far too little attention to the effectiveness of medications used for legitimate purposes like pain control. At the same time, we fret incessantly about drug abuse while doing virtually nothing to prevent or treat addiction. Worse yet, we behave as if these challenges are somehow unrelated when, in fact, they are intricately linked.
The OxyContin story is a prime example of this public-policy hash and underscores the crying need for a plan, a strategy. We need a War on Pain a lot more than we need a War on Drugs.
Getting rid of OxyContin – a drug that can be crushed by addicts who want to snort or inject it rather than use it for its intended purpose, to relieve severe pain – is a good thing, at least superficially.
Concomitant with the disappearance of OxyContin, however, a number of provincial and federal drug plans have “de-listed” OxyNEO – meaning it is no longer paid for by public drug plans. While most patients already prescribed OxyContin will be able to get OxyNEO and have it paid for by the drug plan for a transitional period of up to a year, it will be very difficult for new patients to get the drug, other than those being treated for cancer or requiring it for palliative care.
This too is a good thing, at least theoretically.
Annual prescriptions for oxycodone (the generic name for OxyContin/OxyNEO) have soared nearly 80-fold since the drug was introduced in 2000. Far too many people are taking this highly addictive drug for far too long, especially since there is no research showing that long-term use is safe or effective.
Governments hope the new rules will slow the soaring number of oxycodone prescriptions – 1.6 million last year alone – and reduce drug plan costs, which exceed $150-million annually.
So why so much angst over a seemingly sensible change in public policy?
Two reasons: 1) Because the OxyContin decision will have a ripple effect, one that could have many unintended negative consequences; and 2) The decision, while well-intentioned, seems to ignore the harsh reality that chronic pain and addiction are sprawling societal problems that extend far beyond access – legitimate or otherwise – to a single drug.
Let’s start with the immediate consequences. There are an estimated 200,000 prescription drug addicts in Canada. (More than there are addicts hooked on illicit drugs, by the way. And the distinction is also an artificial one: Oxycodone is only a couple of molecules removed from heroin.) For many, OxyContin – known as hillbilly heroin – is the fix of choice.
With the new rules, one of two things will happen to Oxy addicts: Without access to OxyContin, they will suffer severe withdrawal, or they will switch to another form of opioids like hydromorphone (brand name Dilaudid) or heroin.
There are fewer than 100 “detoxification” beds (for those suffering withdrawal) in Canada; the waits for treatment stretch to six months and beyond. There are treatment programs that offer methadone and suboxone, but those too are in short supply.
There have been dire warnings of mass withdrawal in some first nations where OxyContin addiction is at epidemic levels, but this is unlikely. Far more likely is that new drugs will fill the void, and they will be even more costly. (The pharmacy price for OxyContin was between $1.25 and $6 a pill, depending on dosage; on the street, prices ranged from $5 to $80 a pill.) Bottom line: Those who want help kicking their opioids addiction will have little chance of getting it, and those who remain addicted will have an even more costly, desperate addiction.
But street users of OxyContin are just one part of the issue.
An estimated six million to seven million Canadians suffer from serious chronic pain. In the past decade, they have been treated increasingly with opioids, OxyContin in particular. That’s because it’s a slow-release drug that the maker, Purdue Pharma Canada, cleverly marketed as being less addictive. (Purdue’s parent company was fined more than $600-million for these misleading claims. The drug brings in $3.1-billion a year worldwide, so the fines weren’t too burdensome.) One of the principal reasons painkillers are overprescribed is that physicians get little formal training in dealing with pain; they tend to get their information from drug reps. Moreover, alternatives to drugs like physiotherapy and psychological counselling are not funded.
And while governments are cracking down on prescribing of OxyContin’s substitute, OxyNEO, they are not extending those measures to other opioids.
Without better physician education and improved prescribing guidelines, it is unlikely opioid use will be reduced.
Rather, patients will be switched to other drugs, like Dilaudid, which are just as addictive and far more powerful. These “conversions” are difficult for physicians and patients alike; the Ontario Pharmacists’ Association has warned its members that “unintentional dose escalation” is a serious concern. For many patients, the risk of overdose is very real – and one death has already been linked to conversion. (Opioids depress the central nervous system, meaning people can stop breathing if the dose is too high. OxyContin alone kills an estimated 1,000 people a year in Canada.)
This double whammy – the fear of being cut off painkillers and the risk of alternatives being even more dangerous than OxyContin – is concerning. It is certainly not what policymakers had in mind.
“We cannot let people with serious pain become collateral damage of the war on prescription drug abuse,” the Canadian Pain Society said in a statement.
But the reality is that people with chronic pain are already collateral damage. Frequently their physical pain is treated – often ineffectually – and the price is steep: addiction. In addition to their injuries and illnesses, those with chronic pain have been victims of aggressive marketing by Big Pharma, lack of investment in rehabilitation, inadequate research in pain control and short-sighted public policy.
It’s time for some relief from the suffering, and that will require concerted action. 

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Chronic Pain and Depression

American Chiropractic Association:

Pain serves an important function in our lives. When you suffer an acute injury, pain warns you to stop the activity that is causing the injury and tells you to take care of the affected body part.
Chronic pain, on the other hand, persists for weeks, months, or even years. Some people, often older adults, suffer from chronic pain without any definable past injury or signs of body damage. Common chronic pain can be caused by headaches, the low back, and arthritis. Unfortunately, there is scant objective evidence or physical findings to explain such pain.
Until recently, some doctors who could not find a physical cause for a person’s pain simply suggested that it was imaginary— “all in your head.” This is unfortunate because we know that all pain is real and not imagined, except in the most extreme cases of psychosis. Emerging scientific evidence is demonstrating that the nerves in the spinal cord of patients with chronic pain undergo structural changes.
Psychological and social issues often amplify the effects of chronic pain. For example, people with chronic pain frequently report a wide range of limitations in family and social roles, such as the inability to perform household or workplace chores, take care of children, or engage in leisure activities. In turn, spouses, children, and co-workers often have to take over these responsibilities. Such changes often lead to depression, agitation, resentment, and anger for the pain patient and to stress and strain in family and other social relationships.
How is depression involved with chronic pain?
Depression is the most common emotion associated with chronic pain. It is thought to be 3 to 4 times more common in people with chronic pain than in the general population. In addition, 30 to 80% of people with chronic pain will have some type of depression. The combination of chronic pain and depression is often associated with greater disability than either depression or chronic pain alone.
People with chronic pain and depression suffer dramatic changes in their physical, mental, and social well-being—and in their quality of life. Such people often find it difficult to sleep, are easily agitated, cannot perform their normal activities of daily living, cannot concentrate, and are often unable to perform their duties at work. This constellation of disabilities starts a vicious cycle—pain leads to more depression, which leads to more chronic pain. In some cases, the depression occurs before the pain.
Until recently, we believed that bed rest after an injury was important for recovery. This has likely resulted in many chronic pain syndromes. Avoiding performing activities that a person believes will cause pain only makes his or her condition worse in many cases.
Signs and Symptoms
Some of the common signs and symptoms of chronic pain include:
  • Pain beyond 6 months after an injury
  • Allodynia—pain from stimuli which are not normally painful and/or pain that occurs other than in the stimulated area
  • Hyperpathia—increased pain from stimuli that are normally painful
  • Hypersensation—being overly sensitive to pain
Signs of major clinical depression will occur daily for 2 weeks or more, and often include many of the following:
  • A predominant feeling of sadness; feeling blue, hopeless, or irritable, often with crying spells
  • Changes in appetite or weight (loss or gain) and/or sleep (too much or too little
  • Poor concentration or memory
  • Feeling restless or fatigued
  • Loss of interest or pleasure in usual activities, including sex
  • Feeling of worthlessness and/or guilt
What is the treatment for chronic pain and depression?
The first step in coping with chronic pain is to determine its cause, if possible. Addressing the problem will help the pain subside. In other cases, especially when the pain is chronic, you should try to keep the chronic pain from being the entire focus of your life.
  • Stay active and do not avoid activities that cause pain simply because they cause pain. The amount and type of activity should be directed by your doctor, so that activities that might actually cause more harm are avoided.
  • Relaxation training, hypnosis, biofeedback, and guided imagery, can help you cope with chronic pain. Cognitive therapy can also help patients recognize destructive patterns of emotion and behavior and help them modify or replace such behaviors and thoughts with more reasonable or supportive ones.
  • Distraction (redirecting your attention away from chronic pain), imagery (going to your “happy place”), and dissociation (detaching yourself from the chronic pain) can be useful.
  • Involving your family with your recovery may be quite helpful, according to recent scientific evidence.
  • Drug free Cold Laser Therapy has been found to relieve pain symptoms and offer relief.
Feel free to discuss these or other techniques with your doctor of chiropractic. He or she may suggest some simple techniques that may work for you or may refer you to another health care provider for more in-depth training in these techniques.

For information about Cold Laser Therapy please call 1-866-843-5273 or visit www.theralase.com

Laser-Accelerated INFLAMMATION, PAIN REDUCTION AND HEALING

Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) precipitates a complex set of physiological interactions at the cellular level that reduces acute inflammation, reduces pain, and accelerates tissue healing.

by Richard Martin, BS, CLT

Compromised cells and tissues respond more readily than healthy cells or tissues to energy transfers that occur between LLLT-emitted photons and the receptive chromophores found in the various cells and sub-cellular organelles. Cells and tissues that are ischemic and poorly perfused as a result of inflammation, edema and injury have been shown to have a significantly higher response to LLLT irradiation than normal healthy structures. Cell membranes, mitochondria and damaged neurological structures exhibit less than optimal metabolism and stasis conditions. Multiple studies have demonstrated that under these compromised conditions, the introduction of energy transfers and the resultant enhancement of metabolic activity is most pronounced in biologically challenged components. While it may appear that LLLT is thus selectively targeting compromised cells, in reality, these cells exhibit a lowered reaction threshold to the effects of laser light and are more easily triggered to energy transfer responses. The result is that LLLT has a significant effect on damaged cells and tissues while normative biological constituents are appreciably less affected."

The cellular cascade effect — precipitated by the actions of enzymes and having a significant in the presence of LLLT — has a significant impact on cellular and tissue function. Since a considerable number of the reactive proteins that respond to laser stimulation are enzymes, laser light effects are amplified in the stimulation of beneficial enzymes and depression of deleterious enzymes.

At the cellular level, cytochromes can be defined as electron or proton-transfer proteins that act as energy producers for human biological functions. Both of the cytochrome enzymes, Cytochrome c Oxydase and Nitric Oxide Synthase (NOS) have been found to be particularly reactive to laser photon stimulation. The particular affinity of these and other photoreactive enzymes to accelerate their functions in the presence of LLLT provides critical increases in the molecule ATPand Nitric Oxide (NO) which enhances cellular metabolism, circulatory improvement and nerve function.

Although the various actions of LLLT in regards to inflammation, pain and healing have been separated categorically here for the purpose of process identification, their interactions are not so easily distinguished. In response to LLLT, the reduction in inflammation, pain and healing time all compliment each other and many of the processes are either simultaneous or overlapping.

Acute Inflammation Reduction

Immediately after an acute injury event, the body, in response to the disruption of the integrity of vascular, soft tissue, connective tissue and neurological processes, initiates a series of biological responses. The inflammatory reaction consists of both vascular and cellular events. Injury responsive components such as Mast cells, Bradykinins and Prostaglandins are activated along with the vascular responses and cellular membrane reactions. All of these combined processes and events are represented by the symptoms of edema, inflammation, pain and functional debility. LLLT can be effective in mediating both the symptoms and the underlying inflammatory process by the following actions:

1. Stabilization of cellular membrane — Ca++, Na+ and K+ concentrations as well as the proton gradient over the mitochondria membrane are positively influenced. This is accomplished in part by the production of beneficial Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) wherein triplet oxygen molecules absorb laser light producing singlet oxygen molecules. These ROSmodulate intracellular Ca++ concentrations and laser therapy improves Ca++ uptake in the mitochondria. 2,3,4

2. ATPproduction and synthesis are significantly enhanced, contributing to cellular repair, reproduction and functional ability. Laser stimulation of Cytochrome c Oxidase, a chromophore found on the mitochondria of cells, plays a major role in this rapid increase in production and synthesis of ATP. 3
3. Vasodilation is stimulated via Histamine, Nitric Oxide (NO) and Serotonin increases, resulting in reduction of ischemia and improved perfusion. Lasermediated vasodilation enhances the transport of nutrients and oxygen to the damaged cells and facilitates repair and removal of cellular debris. 5,6

4. Beneficial acceleration of leukocytic activity results in enhanced removal of non-viable cellular and tissue components, allowing for a more rapid repair and regeneration process.
5. Increased Prostaglandin synthesis, particularly in conversion of the prostaglandins PGG2 and PGH2 periossides into prostaglandin PGI2. PGI2 (Prostacyclin), has a vasodilating and antiinflammatory action with some attributes similar to Cox-I and Cox-II inhibitors. 7
6. Reduction in Interleukin 1(IL-1). Laser irradiation has a reducing effect on this pro-inflammatory cytokine that has been implicated in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory conditions. 8
7. Enhanced lymphocyte response. In addition to increasing the number of lymphocytes, laser irradiation mediates the action of both lymphatic helper T-cells and suppressor T-cells in the inflammatory response. Along with laser modification of beta cell activity, the entire lymphatic response is beneficially affected by LLLT. 9
8. Increased angiogenesis. Both blood capillaries and lymphatic capillaries have been clinically documented to undergo significant increase and regeneration in the presence of laser irradiation. The resulting improvement in circulation and perfusion enhances all repair and healing processes. Laser induced increases in NO and the growth factors — in particular cytokine INF-g — are contributory to this process. 10,11
9. Temperature modulation. Areas of inflammation typically demonstrate temperature variations with the inflamed portion having an elevated temperature. Laser therapy has been shown to accelerate temperature normalization, demonstrating its beneficial influence on the inflammatory process.
10. Enhanced superoxide dismutase (SOD) levels. Laser stimulated increases in cytokine SODlevels interact with other anti-inflammatory processes to accelerate the termination of the inflammatory process. Interactions between SODand Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) production subsequent to LLLT balance free radical activity and allows for the beneficial effects of ROSwhile inhibiting detrimental interactions. 12
11. Decreased C-reactive protein and neopterin levels. Laser therapy has been shown to lower the serum levels of these inflammation markers, particularly in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Decreased marker levels are indicative that the combined effects of all LLLT-induced anti-inflammatory actions are effectively reducing the inflammatory process.
A summary flowchart of the cellular cascade in reducing tissue inflamation is presented in Figure 1. The cumulative effect of these multiple inter-active processes and events is an accelerated inflammatory cycle with diminished symptoms and earlier normalization.
Since LLLT does not exacerbate the inflammatory process but rather condenses the time frame from onset to resolution through acceleration of processes, it can be used immediately post injury. This rapid initiation of therapy in acute inflammation will assist in limiting the scope and duration of the inflammatory event and minimize the pain and severity associated with it.
Most of the beneficial effects seen from LLLT in the treatment of acute inflammatory events will also have medical efficacy as LLLT is initiated inmore chronic
inflammatory conditions. While the treatment regimen and course of therapy may be modified in chronic situations, the physiological responses and interactions remain consistent. Chronic conditions may require longer treatment times and results will vary with the patient, condition and length of the chronic condition.
Pain Reduction
The unique pain reduction abilities of LLLT have been extensively researched and documented in numerous clinical studies and medical papers. While there remains much to learn in respect to the various processes through which LLLT achieves its pain reduction characteristics, there is a wealth of knowledge currently available to demonstrate the effectiveness of laser therapy in this regard.

Because the pain amelioration capabilities of LLLT are accomplished via the combination of local and systemic actions — utilizing enzymatic, chemical and physical interventions — the process is very complex. However, there is a preponderance of medical evidence that justifies a conclusion that effective pain reductions can be achieved via LLLT. Following are processes and events that are promoted by LLLT therapy:
1. Increase in b-Endorphins. the localized and systemic increase of this endogenous peptide after LLLT irradiation has been clinically reported in multiple studies with subsequent pain reductions.
2. Blocked depolarization of C-fiber afferent nerves. The pain blocking effect of LLLT can be pronounced, particularly in low velocity neural pathways, such as non-mylenated afferent axons from nociceptors. Laser irradiation suppresses the excitation of these fibers in the afferent sensory pathway. 13,14
3. Increased nitric oxide production. NO has both a direct and indirect impact on pain sensation.
As a neurotransmitter it is essential for normal nerve cell action potential in impulse transmission activity and, indirectly, the vasodilation effect of NOcan enhance nerve cell perfusion and oxygenation.
4. Increased nerve cell action potential.Healthy nerve cells tend to operate at about -70 mV and fire at about -20 mV. Compromised cells membrane potential approximates -20 mV thereby resulting in pain stimulus. LLLT can help restore the action potential closer to the normal -70 mV range. Both compound muscle action potential (CMAP) values and nerve latency values have shown improvement with laser therapy. 15
5. Axonal sprouting and nerve cell regeneration. Several studies have documented the ability of LLLT to induce axonal sprouting and some nerve regeneration in damaged nerve tissues. Where pain sensation is being magnified due to nerve structure damage, cell regeneration and sprouting may assist in pain decrease. 16,17
6. Decreased Bradykinin levels. Since Bradykinins elicit pain by stimulating nociceptive afferents in the skin and viscera, mitigation of elevated levels through LLLT can result in pain reduction. Laser-induced decrease in plasma kallikrein, increase in Kininase II, and increase in NOare considered the contributors to this Bradykinin decrease.
7. Increased release of acetylcholine.By increasing the available acetylcholine, LLLT helps in normalizing nerve signal transmission in the autonomic, somatic and sensory neural pathways.
8. Ion channel normalization.LLLT promotes normalization in Ca++, NA+ and K+ concentrations resulting in beneficial pain reduction results from these ion concentration shifts. Figure 2 presents a simplified representation of the effects of LLLT on pain improvement at the cellular level.
Tissue Healing
One of the truly unique characteristics of LLLT is that it has the ability to actually promote and enhance healing, not just treat symptoms. The irradiation by low-level laser light accelerates and enhances healing activities carried out by the body. Several of the unique characteristics of LLLT that work to alleviate pain and inflammation also play an important role in accelerating the healing process; the LLLT-mediated reduction in inflammation and pain frees the body’s natural ability to repair and heal itself.
As wound healing progresses through the stages of inflammation, proliferation, remodeling and maturation, laser therapy presents the opportunity to impact each of these phases in positive and beneficial ways. LLLT can provide the following beneficial impacts in both open surface wounds and closed connective or soft tissue injuries as follows:
1. Enhanced leukocyte infiltration. LLLT stimulates activity involving neutrophils, monocytes and lymphocytes.
2. Increased macrophage activity. LLLT accelerates macrophage activity in phagocytosis, growth factor secretion and stimulation of collagen synthesis.
3. Increased neovascularization. The significant angiogenesis that occurs with laser therapy promotes revascularization with subsequent improvement in perfusion and oxygenation. Endothelial cell regeneration is accelerated. 18
4. Increased fibroblast proliferation. LLLTstimulation increases fibroblast numbers and fibroblast-mediated collagen production. 19
5. Keratinocyte proliferation.The beneficial synthesis activities and growth factor ability of keratinocytes are enhanced by proliferation secondary to LLLT. 20
6. Early epithelialization. Laser-stimulated acceleration of epithelial cell regeneration speeds up wound healing, minimizes scarring, and reduces infection opportunities.
7. Growth factor increases. Two to five fold increases in growth-phase-specific DNAsynthesis in normal fibroblasts, muscle cells, osteoblasts and mucosal epithelial cells irradiated with IR light are reported. Increases in vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF-2) secondary to IR light irradiation have also been reported.
8. Enhanced cell proliferation and differentiation.Laser-induced increases in NO, ATPand other compounds that stimulate higher activity in cell proliferation and differentiation into mature cells. Increased numbers of myofibroblasts, myofibrils, myotubes etc., as well as bone cell proliferation, have been clinically documented after LLLT. Satellite cells, the precursor cells in the process of muscle regeneration, show significant increase in proliferation when irradiated with LLLT. 21,22,23
9. Greater healed wound tensile strength.In both soft tissue and connective tissue injuries, LLLT can increase the final tensile strength of the healed tissue. By increasing the amount of collagen production/synthesis and by increasing the intra and inter-molecular hydrogen bonding in the collagen molecules, laser therapy contributes to improved tensile strength. 24,25,26,27 The preceding effects combine to achieve an accelerated healing rate (see Figure 3). The time from onset of injury to mature healed wound is reduced. 28
Conclusion
The FDAhas recently cleared multiple laser and LEDdevices for treatment of a variety of medical conditions including carpal tunnel syndrome, cervical neck pain, low back pain, joint pain, generalized muscle pain and acceleration of wound healing. Governmental agencies such as NASAare currently using technical light therapy for medical conditions in space applications. The U.S. Olympic training facilities have just released statements of endorsement for laser therapy for athletes. All of these events validate the growing acceptance in mainstream medicine for the medical efficacy of laser therapy as a viable, often superior therapeutic treatment modality.

With over 200 clinical studies — many of which are double-blind, placebo-controlled — and in excess of 2000 published articles on LLLT, this innovative new technology has a well-documented research and application history. Having grown far beyond its distant Institutional Review Board (IRB) and experimental treatment status, LLLT is now being considered a therapy of choice for many difficult pain management challenges such as fibromyalgia and myofascial pain. New and ongoing clinical investigations offer growing potential for even more widespread applications of this truly unique light therapy.

Richard Martin, BS, CLT is a photobiologist specializing in laser therapy and holds the position of Director of Science at MicroLightLaser, a subsidiary of Innovative Medical Group Corporation in Santa Monica, CA. He has taught laser physics and photodynamics for eight years. He has served as manager for several biomedical design and service facilities and participated as lead researcher for biomedical devices involved in emergency cardiac care, warmed intravenous fluid therapy and laser therapy. Richard has participated in medical clinical trials for 15 years as a clinical trial analyst and contributing clinician.
References
1. Almeida-Lopes L. Human gingival fibroblast proliferation enhanced by LLLT. Analysis in vitro of the cellular proliferation of human gingival fibroblasts with low level laser. Dissertation at Universidade do Vale do Paraíba, São Paulo, Brazil. 1999.

2. Lubart R, Friedman H, and Lavie R. Photobiostimulation as a function of different wavelengths. bone regeneration. The Journal of Laser Therapy. Vol 12. World Association of Laser Therapy. 2000.
3. Karu T. et al. Changes in absorbance on monolayer of living cells induced by laser irradiation. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics. IEEE Lasers and Electro-Optical Society. December 2001. 7(6):982.
4. De Castro E Silva Jr. O, et al. Laser enhancement in hepatic regeneration for partially hepatectomized rats. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2001. 29(1):73-77
5. Silveira LB, et al. In vivo study on mast cells behaviour following low-intensity visible and near infrared laser radiation. Laser Surg Med. Abstract issue. Abstract 304. 2002.
6. Trelles MA, et al. LLLT in vivo effects on mast cells. Department of Tissue Pathology, University Hospital, Tarragona, Spain. Abstract from the 7th International Congress of European Medical Laser Association, Dubrovnik, Croatia, June 2000.
7. Tam G. Action of 904 nm diode laser in orthopedics and traumatology. Laser Center, Tolmezzo, Italy. Meridian Co, Ltd. Website:http://www.meridian.co.kr/ product1_8.htm. Last visited 10/27/03.
8. Bjordal JM, and Couppe C. What is optimal dose, power density and timing for low level laser therapy in tendon injuries?A review of in vitro and in vivo trials. Department of Physiotherapy Science, University of Bergen, Norway. Abstract from the 7th International Congress of European Medical Laser Association, Dubrovnik, Croatia, June 2000.
9. Stadler I, et al. In vitro effects of low level laser irradiation at 660 nm on peripheral blood lymphocytes. Lasers Surg Med. 2000. 27(3):255-61
10. Kubota J. Laser and sports medicine in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Kyorin University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. Abstract from II Congress of the Internat. Assn for Laser and Sports Medicine, Rosario, Argentina, March 10-12, 2000.
11. Lievens P and Van der Veen PH. Wound healing process: influence of LLLT on the proliferation of fibroblasts and on the lymphatic regeneration. Department of Rehabilitation research, Vrije University, Brussels, Belgium. Abstract from the 7th International Congress of European Medical Laser Association, Dubrovnik, Croatia, June 2000.
12. Karu TI. Mechanisms of low-power laser light action on cellular level. In Lasers in Medicine and Dentistry. Ed. by Z.Simunovic. Rijeka. Vitgraph. 2000. pp. 97-125.
13. Ohno T. Pain suppressive effect of low power laser irradiation. A quantitative analysis of substance P in the rat spinal dorsal root ganglion. J Nippon Med Sch. 1997. 64 (5):395-400.
14. Tsuchiya K et al. Diode laser irradiation selectively diminishes slow component of axonal volleys to dorsal roots from the saphenous nerve. Neuroscience Letters. 1993. 161:65-68.
15. Rochkind S, et al. Laser therapy as a new modality in the treatment of incomplete peripheral nerve injuries: Prospective Clinical Double-Blind PlaceboControlled Randomized Study. Department of Neurosurgery, Rehabilitation and Physiotherapy, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Israel. Abstract from the 7th International Congress of European Medical Laser Association, Dubrovnik, Croatia, June 2000.
16. Byrnes KR, et al. Cellular invasion following spinal cord lesion and low power laser irradiation. Lasers Surg Med. 2002. S14:11.
17. Rochkind S, Shahar A, and Nevo Z. An innovative approach to induce regeneration and the repair of spinal cord injury. Laser Therapy. 1997; 9 (4):151.
18. Schindler A, et al. Increased dermal neovascularization after low dose laser therapy. 2nd Congress, World Association for Laser Therapy. Kansas City. 1998.
19. Almeida-Lopes L, et al. Comparison of the low level laser therapy effects on cultured human gingival fibroblasts proliferation using different irradiance and same fluence. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2001. 29(2):179-184.
20. Samoilova KA, et al. Enhancement of the blood growth promoting activity after exposure of volunteers to visible and infrared polarized light. Part I: stimulation of human keratinocyte proliferation in vitro. Advance Article of 2004 Photochemical & Photobiological Sciences. Published on the web at http://www.rsc.org/is/journals/current/PPS/ppAdvArts.htm. Sept 1, 2003.
21. Barber A, et al. Advances in laser therapy for bone repair. The Journal of Laser Therapy. Vol.13. World Association of Laser Therapy. 2000.
22. Antonio L, et al. Biomodulatory effects of LLLT on bone regeneration. The Journal of Laser Therapy. Vol. 13. World Association of Laser Therapy. 2000.
23. Shefer G, et al. Low energy laser irradiation promotes the survival and cell cycle entry of skeletal muscle satellite cells. Journal of Cell Science. 2002. 115:1461-1469.
24. Enwemeka CS and Reddy GK. The biological effects of laser therapy and other modalities on connective tissue repair processes. The Journal of Laser Therapy. Vol. 12. World Association of Laser Therapy. 2000.
25. Reddy GK, Stehno-Bittel L, and Enwemeka CS. Laser photo stimulation accelerates wound healing in diabetic rats. Wound Repair and Regeneration. 2001. 9:248-255.
26. Stadler I, et al. 830 nm irradiation increases the wound tensile strength in diabetic murine model. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2001. 28 (3):220226.
27. Parizotto N, et al. Structural analysis of collagen fibrils after He-Ne laser photostimulation. 2nd Congress, World Association for Laser Therapy. Kansas City. 1998.
28. Simunovic Z, et al. Low level laser therapy of soft tissue injuries upon sport activities and traffic accidents: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study on 132 patients. Pain Center-Laser Center, Locarno, Switzerland. Abstract from II Congress of the Internat. Assn for Laser and Sports Medicine, Rosario, Argentina. March 10-12, 2000. 


For further information, please call 1-866-843-5273 or visit www.theralase.com