Ultrasound molecular imaging of VEGFR2 in a rat prostate tumor model using BR55

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 45, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 573-578

  Tardy, Isabelle ^a   Pochon, Sibylle ^a   Theraulaz, Martine ^a   Emmel, Patricia ^a   Passantino, Lisa ^b   Tranquart, François ^a   Schneider, Michel ^a  

^a Bracco Suisse SA   (Switzerland)

^b Bracco Research USA   (United States)

Author keywords

angiogenesis; BR55; prostate tumor; ultrasound targeted contrast agent; VEGFR2

Indexed keywords

BIOTIN; BR 55; ECHO CONTRAST MEDIUM; POLYCLONAL ANTIBODY; RECEPTOR ANTIBODY; SONOVUE; STREPTAVIDIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VASCULOTROPIN RECEPTOR 2;

ANGIOGENESIS; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DOSE RESPONSE; IMAGING SYSTEM; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MALE; MICROBUBBLE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE ADENOCARCINOMA; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE TUMOR; RAT; TUMOR CELL; ULTRASOUND;

EID: 77957269295     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181ee8b83     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Heijmink SW, van Moerkerk H, Kiemeney LA, et al. A comparison of the diagnostic performance of systematic versus ultrasound-guided biopsies of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:927-938.
2. Aus G, Abbou CC, Bolla M, et al. European Association of Urology: EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2005;48:546-551.
3. Jones JS, Patel A, Schoenfield L, et al. Saturation technique does not improve cancer detection as an initial prostate biopsy strategy. J Urol. 2006;175:485-488.
4. Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, et al. The sextant protocol for ultrasound guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology. 1997;50:562-566.
5. Wink M, Frauscher F, Cosgrove D, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and prostate cancer; a multicentre European research coordination project. Eur Urol. 2008;54:982-992.
6. Aigner F, Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonog-raphy using cadence-contrast pulse sequencing technology for targeted biopsy of the prostate. BJU Int. 2009;10:458-463.
7. Loch T. Urologic imaging for localized prostate cancer in 2007. World J Urol. 2007;25:121-129.
8. Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Pelzer A, et al. Ultrasound of prostate cancer: recent advances. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:707-715.
9. Folkman J. Angiogenesis and proteins of the hemostatic system. J Thromb Haemost. 2003;1:1681-1682.
10. Dvorak HF. Angiogenesis: update 2005. J Thromb Haemost. 2005;3:1835-1842.
11. Shibuya M. Differential roles of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 and receptor-2 in angiogenesis. J Biochem Mol Biol. 2006;39:469-478.
12. Carmeliet P. Angiogenesis in life, disease and medicine. Nature. 2005;438: 932-936.
13. Pallares J, Rojo F, Iriarte J, et al. Study of microvessel density and the expression of the angiogenic factors VEGF, bFGF and the receptors Flt-1 and Flk-1 in benign, premalignant and malignant prostate tissues. Histol His-topathol. 2006;21:857-865.
14. Lee DL, Lyshchik A, Huamani J, et al. Relationship between retention of a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2)-targeted ultrasono-graphic contrast agent and the level of VEGFR2 expression in an in vivo breast cancer model. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:855-866.
15. Lyshchik A, Fleischer AC, Huamani J, et al. Molecular imaging of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 expression using targeted contrast-enhanced high-frequency ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med. 2007;26:1575-1586.
16. Rychak J, Graba J, Cheung AM, et al. Micro-ultrasound molecular imaging of vascular endothelial growth factor 2 in a mouse model of tumor angiogenesis. Mol Imaging. 2007;6:289-296.
17. Pochon S, Tardy I, Bussat P, et al. BR55: a Lipopeptide-based KDR-targeted ultrasound contrast agent for molecular imaging of angiogenesis. Invest Radiol. 2010;45:89-95.
18. Shrivastava A, von Wronski MA, Sato AK, et al. A distinct strategy to generate high-affinity peptide binders to receptor tyrosine kinases. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2005;18:417-424.
19. Lein M, Jung K, Le D, et al. Synthetic inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases (Batimastat) reduces prostate cancer growth in an orthotopic rat model. Prostate. 2000;43:77-82.
20. Rognin NG, Frinking P, Costa M, et al. In-vivo perfusion quantification by contrast ultrasound: validation of the use of linearized video data vs. raw RF data. Proc IEEE Ultrason Symp Beijing (China). 2008:1690-1693.
21. Tang J, Yang JC, Luo Y, et al. Enhancement characteristics of benign and malignant focal peripheral nodules in the peripheral zone of the prostate gland studied using contrast-enhanced transrectal ultrasound. Clin Radiol. 2008;63: 1086-1091.
22. Tang J, Yan JC, Li Y, et al. Peripheral zone hypoechoic lesions of the prostate: evaluation with contrast-enhanced gray scale transrectal ultrasonog-raphy. J Ultrasound Med. 2007;26:1671-1679.
23. Mitterberger M, Pinggera GM, Horninger W, et al. Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy to conventional systematic biopsy: impact on gleason score. J Urology. 2007;178:464-468.
24. Halpern EJ, Ramey JR, Strup SE, et al. Detection of prostate carcinoma with contrast-enhanced sonography using intermittent harmonic imaging. Cancer. 2005;104:2373-2383.
25. Mitterberger M, Horninger W, Pelzer A, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing contrast-enhanced targeted versus systematic ultrasound guided biopsies: impact on prostate cancer detection. Prostate. 2007;67:1537-1542.
26. Schneider M. Molecular imaging and ultrasound.-assisted drug delivery. J Endourology. 2008;22:795-801.
27. Korpanty G, Carbon JG, Grayburn PA, et al. Monitoring response to anti-cancer therapy by targeting microbubbles to tumor vasculature. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:323-330.
28. Willmann JK, Paulmurugan R, Chen K, et al. US imaging of tumor angio-genesis with microbubbles targeted to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor type 2 in mice. Radiology. 2008;246:508-518.