Static magnetic field promotes the doxorubicin toxicity effects on osteosarcoma cells
← Research streamIn G292 osteosarcoma cells, static magnetic field (SMF) combined with doxorubicin reduced cell viability more than doxorubicin alone, with the reported IC50 decreasing from 3.2 µM at 3 mT to 0.8 µM at 24 mT after 24 h. The combination also increased apoptosis…
Study snapshot
Abstract
Osteosarcoma, a highly aggressive bone cancer, primarily affects adolescents and is frequently treated with conventional chemotherapy, such as doxorubicin (DOX). However, the efficacy of DOX is often limited by severe side effects and drug resistance. This study investigates the synergistic effects of static magnetic fields (SMF) and DOX on G292 osteosarcoma cells and HFF normal fibroblasts. Cell viability was assessed using the MTT assay, intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels were quantified via DCFDA staining and flow cytometry, and iron and calcium homeostasis were analyzed using ICP-OES. Apoptosis and necrosis were determined through Annexin V-FITC/PI staining. Results demonstrated that the combination of SMF and DOX significantly reduced G292 cell viability compared to DOX alone, with IC50 values decreased from 3.2 µM (at 3 mT, p < 0.01) to 0.8 µM (at 24 mT, p < 0.001) at 24 h. Apoptosis rates increased from 8.12% with DOX alone to 16% with SMF + DOX. While DOX alone elevated ROS levels by 59.15% in G292 cells, SMF further amplified apoptosis by enhancing ROS generation and disrupting iron and calcium homeostasis. These findings suggest that SMF enhances DOX-induced cytotoxicity in osteosarcoma cells by promoting ROS production, altering metal ion homeostasis, and increasing apoptosis. SMF represents a promising adjuvant therapy for osteosarcoma treatment, though further in vivo studies are necessary to optimize treatment parameters and evaluate clinical applicability.
AI evidence extraction
Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.
Main findings
In G292 osteosarcoma cells, static magnetic field (SMF) combined with doxorubicin reduced cell viability more than doxorubicin alone, with the reported IC50 decreasing from 3.2 µM at 3 mT to 0.8 µM at 24 mT after 24 h. The combination also increased apoptosis (from 8.12% with doxorubicin alone to 16%) and was associated with higher ROS generation and disrupted iron and calcium homeostasis.
Outcomes measured
- cell viability
- intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS)
- iron homeostasis
- calcium homeostasis
- apoptosis
- necrosis
Limitations
- In vitro cell study
- Further in vivo studies were stated as necessary to optimize treatment parameters and evaluate clinical applicability
View raw extracted JSON
{
"study_type": "in_vitro",
"exposure": {
"band": "static magnetic field",
"source": "other",
"frequency_mhz": null,
"sar_wkg": null,
"duration": "24 h"
},
"population": "G292 osteosarcoma cells and HFF normal fibroblasts",
"sample_size": null,
"outcomes": [
"cell viability",
"intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS)",
"iron homeostasis",
"calcium homeostasis",
"apoptosis",
"necrosis"
],
"main_findings": "In G292 osteosarcoma cells, static magnetic field (SMF) combined with doxorubicin reduced cell viability more than doxorubicin alone, with the reported IC50 decreasing from 3.2 µM at 3 mT to 0.8 µM at 24 mT after 24 h. The combination also increased apoptosis (from 8.12% with doxorubicin alone to 16%) and was associated with higher ROS generation and disrupted iron and calcium homeostasis.",
"effect_direction": "benefit",
"limitations": [
"In vitro cell study",
"Further in vivo studies were stated as necessary to optimize treatment parameters and evaluate clinical applicability"
],
"evidence_strength": "low",
"confidence": 0.95,
"peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
"keywords": [
"static magnetic field",
"SMF",
"doxorubicin",
"osteosarcoma",
"G292 cells",
"HFF fibroblasts",
"ROS",
"apoptosis",
"iron homeostasis",
"calcium homeostasis",
"in vitro"
],
"suggested_hubs": []
}AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.
Identifiers and source
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-96802-0
PubMed: 40195518
Related papers
- [Synergistic inhibitory effect of static magnetic field and antitumor drugs on Hepa1-6 cells]. 2015
- Static magnetic fields as a factor in modification of tissue and cell structure: a review 2024
- Exposure to a static magnetic field attenuates hepatic damage and function abnormality in obese and diabetic mice 2023
- Static magnetic fields from earphones: Detailed measurements plus some open questions 2022
- Complex Electromagnetic Issues Associated with the Use of Electric Vehicles in Urban Transportation 2022
- Distinct fatty acid redistribution and textural changes in the brain tissue upon the static magnetic field exposure 2022