Fig. 3

a The impact of various treatment approaches on the viability of prostate cancer (DU-145) cells. In all in vitro research groups, cells were subjected to several treatment modalities including serial dilution of EP@RRBP-CNP for 24 h, a. microscopic examinations, and b. dosage response curves. The SRB test was applied to assess cell viability. Viability of cells (%): F(p) = 5.317 (< 0.001*). The data (n = 3) are shown as mean ± SD. ^a,b,c,d,e Significant with (untreated prostate cancer group, non-activated EP@RRBP-CNP-treated group, X-ray subjected group, ultrasound subjected group, X-ray + ultrasound group). b The impact of various treatment approaches on the distribution of prostate cancer (DU-145) cell cycles throughout all in vitro research groups. 1. For a 24-h period, cells were subjected to various treatment modalities; 2. DNA cytometry analysis was applied to assess the cell cycle distribution, and the proportion of total events for each phase of the cell was plotted; SubG1, G0/G1, S, G2/M (%):F(p) = 92.269 (< 0.001*), 21.040 (< 0.001*), 24.871 (< 0.001*), 29.128 (< 0.001*).The data (n = 3) are shown as mean ± SD. ^a,b,c,d,e Significant with (untreated prostate cancer group, non-activated EP@RRBP-CNP-treated group, X-ray subjected group, ultrasound subjected group, X-ray + ultrasound group). c The impact of various treatment approaches on necrosis and apoptosis of prostate cancer (DU-145) across all in vitro research groups. 1. For 24 h, cells were subjected to various treatment modalities; 2. Annexin V-FITC/PI was applied to stain the cells, and various cell populations were plotted as a proportion of the total events. Early apoptosis, late apoptosis, early and late apoptosis, total cell death, necrosis: F(p) = 22.442 (< 0.001*), 1.225E3 (< 0.001*), 576.403 (< 0.001*), 221.856 (< 0.001*), 683.977 (< 0.001*) for. The data (n = 3) are shown as mean ± SD. ^a,b,c,d,e Significant with (untreated prostate cancer group, non-activated EP@RRBP-CNP-treated group, X-ray subjected group, ultrasound subjected group, X-ray + ultrasound group). d The impact of various treatment approaches on the autophagy of prostate cancer (DU-145) across all in vitro research groups. 1. After 24 h of exposure to various treatment modalities, cells were labeled using Cyto-ID autophagosome tracker. 2. Plotting of net fluorescent intensity (NFI; red color) was done in comparison to the control group's basal fluorescence (green color). Autophagy (%): F(p) = 61.235 (< 0.001*). The data (n = 3) are shown as mean ± SD. ^a,b,c,d,e Significant with (untreated prostate cancer group, non-activated EP@RRBP-CNP-treated group, X-ray subjected group, ultrasound subjected group, X-ray + ultrasound group). e The impact of the distinct treatment methods on the migration of prostate cancer patients (DU-145): 1. untreated DU-145; 2. X-ray + ultrasound treatment only; and 3. EP@RRBP-CNP + X-ray + ultrasound treatment. The percentages for wound clousure-24, 48, 72 h are F(p) = 80.297 (< 0.001*), 19.359 (< 0.001*), 19.706 (< 0.001*)..^a,b,c Significant with (untreated prostate cancer group, X-ray + ultrasound group, X-ray + ultrasound + EP@RRBP-CNP group)