Optical imaging of mammary and prostate tumors in living animals using a synthetic near infrared zinc(II)-dipicolylamine probe for anionic cell surfaces

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Volumn 132, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 67-69

  Smith, Bryan A ^a   Akers, Walter J ^b   Leevy, W Matthew ^a   Lampkins, Andrew J ^a   Xiao, Shuzhang ^a   Wolter, William ^a   Suckow, Mark A ^a   Achilefu, Samuel ^b   Smith, Bradley D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL MODEL; ANIONIC MEMBRANES; CELL SURFACES; EX-VIVO; FLUORESCENT IMAGING; HISTOLOGICAL ANALYSIS; IN-VITRO; IN-VIVO; LIVING ANIMALS; MAMMARY TUMORS; NEAR INFRARED; OPTICAL IMAGING; PROSTATE TUMOR;

ANIMALS; CELL MEMBRANES; FLUOROPHORES; INFRARED DEVICES; ONCOLOGY; OPTICAL IMAGE STORAGE; PROBES; TUMORS; ZINC COMPOUNDS;

ZINC;

AMINE; ANION; LIGAND; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; ZINC DERIVATIVE; ZINC DIPICOLYLAMINE;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CELL MEMBRANE; CELL SURFACE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FLUORESCENCE; HISTOLOGY; IMAGING SYSTEM; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; MICROSCOPY; MOLECULAR PROBE; MOUSE; NEAR INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY; NONHUMAN; PROSTATE TUMOR; RAT; TUMOR XENOGRAFT;

ABSORPTION; AMINES; ANIMALS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CELL LINE, TUMOR; CELL SURVIVAL; CELL TRANSFORMATION, NEOPLASTIC; FLUORESCENT DYES; INFRARED RAYS; MALE; MICE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; PICOLINIC ACIDS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RATS; ZINC;

EID: 74849090694     PISSN: 00027863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ja908467y     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Kulasingam, V.; Diamandis, E. P. Nat. Clin. Pract. Oncol. 2008, 5, 588-599.
2. Hoffman, P. R.; deCathelineau, A. M.; Ogden, C. A.; Leverrier, Y.; Bratton, D. L.; Daleke, D. L.; Ridley, A. J.; Fadok, V. A.; Henson, P. M. J. Cell Biol. 2001, 155, 649-659.
3. Elliot, J. I.; Surprenant, A.; Marelli-Berg, F. M.; Cooper, J. C.; Cassady-Cain, R. L.; Wooding, C.; Linton, K.; Alexander, D. R.; Higgins, C. F. Nat. Cell Biol. 2005, 8, 808-816.
4. Ran, S.; Downes, A.; Thorpe, P. A. Cancer Res. 2002, 62, 6132-6140.
5. Distler, J. H. W.; Huber, L. C.; Reich, C. F., III; Gay, S.; Distler, O.; Pisetsky, D. S. Apoptosis 2005, 10, 731-741.
6. Epand, R. M.; Epand, R. F. Mol. BioSyst. 2009, 5, 580-587.
7. Mercer, J.; Helenius, A. Science 2008, 320, 531-535.
8. (a) Jennewein, M.; Lewis, M. A.; Zhao, D.; Tsyganov, E.; Slavine, N.; He, J.; Watkins, L.; Kodibagkar, V. D.; O'Kelly, S.; Kulkarni, P.; Antich, P. P.; Hermanne, A.; Rosch, F.; Mason, R. P.; Thorpe, P. E. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008, 14, 1377-1385.
9. (b) Krishnan, A. S.; Neves, A. A.; de Backer, M. M.; Hu, D. E.; Davletov, B.; Kettunen, M. I.; Brindle, K. M. Radiology 2008, 246, 854-862.
10. Kenis, H.; Hofstra, L.; Reutelingsperger, C. P. M. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2007, 64, 2859-2862.
11. Ran, S.; He, J.; Huang, X.; Soares, M.; Scothorn, D.; Thorpe, P. E. Clin. Cancer Res. 2005, 11, 1551-1562.
12. (a) Boersma, H. H.; Kietselar, B. L. J. H.; Stolk, L. M. L.; Bennaghmouch, A.; Hofstra, L.; Narula, J.; Heidendal, G. A. K.; Reutelingsperger, C. P. M. J. Nucl. Med. 2005, 46, 2035-2050.
13. (b) Blankenberg, F. G. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2008, 7, 1-8.
14. (a) Soares, M. M.; King, S. W.; Thorpe, P. E. Nat. Med. 2008, 14, 1357-1362.
15. (b) Huang, X.; Bennett, M.; Thorpe, P. E. Cancer Res. 2005, 65, 4408-4416.
16. (a) Lambert, T. N.; Smith, B. D. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2003, 240, 129-141.
17. (b) Hanshaw, R. G.; Stahelin, R. V.; Smith, B. D. Chem.-Eur. J. 2008, 14, 1690-1697.
18. For recent reviews of molecular recognition using Zn-DPA complexes, see: (a) Sakamoto, T.; Ojida, A.; Hamachi, I. Chem. Commun. 2009, 141-152.
19. (b) Kim, S. K.; Lee, D. H.; Hong, J.-I.; Yoon, J. Acc. Chem. Res. 2009, 42, 23-31.
20. Kruppa, M.; König, B. Chem. Rev. 2006, 106, 3520-3560.
21. (a) Hanshaw, R. G.; Smith, B. D. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2005, 13, 5035-5042.
22. (b) O'Neil, E. J.; Smith, B. D. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2006, 250, 3068-3080.
23. (a) Hanshaw, R. G.; Lakshmi, C.; Lambert, T. N.; Johnson, J. R.; Smith, B. D. ChemBioChem 2005, 12, 2214-2220.
24. (b) DiVittorio, K. M.; Johnson, J. R.; Johansson, E.; Reynolds, A. J.; Jolliffe, K. A.; Smith, B. D. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2006, 4, 1966-1976.
25. (c) Koulov, A. V.; Stucker, K.; Lakshmi, C.; Robinson, J. P.; Smith, B. D. Cell Death Differ. 2003, 10, 1357-1359.
26. (d) Koulov, A. V.; Hanshaw, R. G.; Stucker, K. A.; Lakshmi, C.; Smith, B. D. Isr. J. Chem. 2005, 45, 373-379.
27. (e) Quinti, L.; Weissleder, R.; Tung, C. H. Nano Lett. 2006, 6, 488-490.
28. Leevy, W. M.; Johnson, J. R.; Lakshmi, C.; Morris, J.; Marquez, M.; Smith, B. D. Chem Commun. 2006, 1595-1597.
29. (a) Leevy, W. M.; Gammon, S. T.; Jiang, H.; Johnson, J. R.; Maxwell, D. J.; Marquez, M.; Piwnica-Worms, D.; Smith, B. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 16476-16477.
30. (b) Leevy, W. M.; Gammon, S. T.; Johnson, J. R.; Lampkins, A. J.; Jiang, H.; Marquez, M.; Piwnica-Worms, D.; Suckow, M. A.; Smith, B. D. Bioconjugate Chem. 2008, 19, 686-692.
31. Fragioni, J. V. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2003, 7, 626-634.
32. Control 3 is the near-IR fluorophore, Indocyanine Green (ICG), which is approved for use in humans. It associates strongly with plasma proteins and is rapidly cleared by the liver. ICG and non-targeted ICG-conjugates typically exhibit modest tumor targeting ability (T/NT < 2) due to enhanced permeation-retention (EPR) effects. See, for example: (a) Becker, A.; Riefke, B.; Ebert, B.; Sukowski, U.; Rinneberg, H.; Semmler, W.; Licha, K. Photochem. Photobiol. 2000, 72, 234-241.
33. (b) Licha, K.; Riefke, B.; Ntziachristos, V.; Beckerm, A.; Chance, B.; Semmler, W. Photochem. Photobiol. 2000, 72, 392-398.
34. (c) Perliz, C.; Licha, K.; Scholle, F.-D.; Ebert, B.; Bahner, M.; Hauff, P.; Moesta, K. T.; Schirner, M. J. Fluoresc. 2005, 15, 443-454
35. For a recent serendipitous discovery of high ICG localization in human hepatocellular carcinoma, see: (d) Gotoh, K.; Yamada, T.; Ishikawa, O.; Takahashi, H.; Eguchi, H.; Yano, M.; Ohigashi, H.; Tomita, Y.; Miyamoto, Y.; Imaoka, S. J. Surg. Oncol. 2009, 100, 75-79.
36. Pollard, M.; Suckow, M. A. Exp. Biol. Med. 2005, 230, 520-526.
37. Bonnitcha, P. D.; Vavere, A. L.; Lewis, J. S.; Dilworth, J. R. J. Med. Chem. 2008, 51, 2985-2991.
38. Kaijzel, E. L.; van der Pluijm, G.; Lowik, C. W. G. M. Clin. Cancer Res. 2007, 13, 3490-3497.
39. Direct comparison of ex vivo mean pixel intensities for probe 1 and control fluorophore 2 is possible because they have essentially identical brightness and the same fraction of light absorption/scattering by the excised tissue. The average ex vivo tumor intensity from rat dosed with probe 1 is 16-fold higher than rat dosed with control fluorophore 3 (ICG, see ref 20); however, this is only a qualitative measure of relative tumor selectivity because the brightness of 3 in tumor tissue is somewhat uncertain. As expected, the ex vivo imaging with probe 1 shows higher tumor selectivity than the in vivo imaging (T/NT) because the fluorescence signal from the implanted tumor is attenuated by the surrounding skin and tissue. (25) At this point, we cannot rule out that a fraction of probe 1 is targeting the anionic epithelial cell surfaces that line the tumor vasculature. For further discussion of this possibility, see ref 10. Another topic for further study is whether probe 1 maintains its zinc(II) ions at the in vivo binding site. For evidence that this is the case in vitro, see: DiVittorio, K. M.; Leevy, W. M.; O'Neil, E. J.; Johnson, J. R.; Vakulenko, S.; Morris, J. D.; Rosek, K. D.; Serazin, N.; Hilkert, S.; Hurley, S.; Marquez, M.; Smith, B. D. ChemBioChem 2008, 9, 286-293.
40. (a) Loose, D.; Vermeersch, H.; De Vos, F.; Deron, P.; Slegers, G.; De Wiele, C. V. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2008, 35, 47-52.
41. (b) Konstantinidou, A. E.; Korkolopoulou, P.; Patsoursis, E. J. Neuro-Oncol. 2005, 72, 151-156.
42. Brindle, K. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2008, 8, 94-107.
43. Weissleder, R.; Pittet, M. J. Nature 2008, 452, 580-589.