Traslational perspectives in molecular imaging: Methodological evolution and nanostructured materials;Prospettive traslazionali dell'imaging molecolare: Evoluzione delle metodiche e materiali nanostrutturati

Recenti Progressi in Medicina

Volumn 103, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 142-153

  Pascali, Giancarlo ^a   Conversano, Francesco ^a   Casciaro, Sergio ^a   Salvadori, Piero A ^a  

^a CNR   (Italy)

Author keywords

Imaging tracers; Magnetic resonance; Molecular imaging; Positron emission tomography; Theranostics; Ultrasounds

Indexed keywords

NANOMATERIAL;

METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR IMAGING; REVIEW; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH;

HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NANOSTRUCTURES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH;

EID: 84861473801     PISSN: 00341193     EISSN: 20381840     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1701/1068.11704     Document Type: Review

References (98)

1. Weissleder R, Mahmood U. Molecular Imaging. Radiology 2001; 219: 316-33. (Pubitemid 32336342)
2. Mankoff DA. A definition of molecular imaging. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 18N, 21N.
3. Hahn MA, Singh AK, Sharma P, et al. Nanoparticles as contrast agents for in-vivo bioimaging: current status and future perspectives. Anal Bioanal Chem 2011; 399: 3-27.
4. Conversano F, Greco A, Casciaro S. Smart nano-systems for tumour cellular diagnoses and therapies. In: Lay-Ekuakille A, et al. (eds). Wearable and autonomous biomedical devices and systems for smart environment. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag 2010, pp. 31-54.
5. Massoud TF, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging in living subjects: seeing fundamental biological processes in a new light. Genes Dev 2003; 17: 545-80. (Pubitemid 36307540)
6. Mariani G, Bruselli L, Kuwert T, et al. A review on the clinical uses of SPECT/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37: 1959-85.
7. Montini G, Farsad M, Fanti S, et al. La scintigrafia dei recettori della somatostatina (octreoscan) nel follow up dei pazienti con carcinoide bronchiale. OdV 2002; 3: 1-7.
8. Taneja SS. ProstaScint® Scan: contemporary use in clinical practice. Rev Urol 2004; 6: S19-S28.
9. Goldenberg DM, Juweid M, Dunn RM, Sharkey RM. Cancer imaging with radiolabeled antibodies: new advances with technetium-99m-labeled monoclonal antibody Fab' fragments, especially CEA-Scan and prospects for therapy. J Nucl Med Technol 1997; 25: 18-23. (Pubitemid 27129302)
10. Baechler S, Hobbs RF, Jacene HA, et al. Predicting hematologic toxicity in patients undergoing radioimmunotherapy with 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan or 131I-tositumomab. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 1878-84.
11. Miller PW, Long NJ, Vilar R, Gee AD. Synthesis of 11C, 18F, 15O, and 13N radiolabels for positron emission tomography. Angew Chem Int Ed 2008; 47: 8998-9033.
12. Li Z, Conti PS. Radiopharmaceutical chemistry for positron emission tomography. Adv Drug Del Rev 2010; 62: 1031-51.
13. Mercer JR. Molecular imaging agents for clinical positron emission tomography in oncology other than fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG): applications, limitations and potential. J Pharm Sci 2007; 10: 180-202.
14. Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, et al. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37: 181-200.
15. Schwaiger M, Ziegler S, Nekolla SG. PET/CT: Challenge for nuclear cardiology. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 1664-78. (Pubitemid 46217471)
16. Silverman DHS. Brain 18F-FDG PET in the diagnosis of neurodegenerative dementias: comparison with perfusion SPECT and with clinical evaluations lacking nuclear imaging. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 594-607. (Pubitemid 47618590)
17. Haubner R, Beer AJ, Wang H, Chen X. Positron emission tomography tracers for imaging angiogenesis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37: S86-S103.
18. Reshef A, Shirvan A, Akselrod-Ballin A, Wall A, Ziv I. Small-molecule biomarkers for clinical PET imaging of apoptosis. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 837-40.
19. Phelps ME, Mazziotta JC, Huang S-C. Study of cerebral function with positron computed tomography. J Cer Blood Flow Met 1982; 2: 113-62. (Pubitemid 12024650)
20. Coenen HH, Elsinga PH, Iwata R, et al. Fluorine-18 radiopharmaceuticals beyond [18F]FDG for use in oncology and neurosciences. Nucl Med Biol 2010; 37: 727-40.
21. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 122S-150S.
22. Aime S, Botta M, Terreno E. Gd(III)-based contrast agents for MRI. Adv Inorg Chem 2005; 57: 173-237.
23. Na HB, Hyeon T. Nanostructured t1MRI contrast agents. J Mater Chem 2009; 19: 6267-73.
24. Wickline SA, Neubauer A, Winter P, et al. Molecular imaging and therapy of atherosclerosis with targeted nanoparticles. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25: 667-80. (Pubitemid 46516717)
25. Flacke S, Fischer S, Scott MJ, et al. Novel MRI contrast agent for molecular imaging of fibrin: implications for detecting vulnerable plaques. Circulation 2001; 104: 1280-5. (Pubitemid 32848118)
26. Burte C Laurent S, Murariu O, et al. Molecular imaging of v 3 integrin expression in atherosclerotic plaques with a mimetic of RGD peptide grafted to Gd-DTPA. Cardiovasc Res 2008; 78: 148-57.
27. Haacke EM, Lai S, Yablonskiy DA, Lin W. In vivo validation of the bold mechanism: a review of signal changes in gradient echo functional MRI in the presence of flow. Int J Imaging Syst Technol 1995; 6: 153-63.
28. van den Heuvel MP, Hulshoff Pol HE. Exploring the brain network: a review on resting-state fMRI functional connectivity. Eu Neuropsychopharmacology 2010; 20: 519-34.
29. Nelson SJ, Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron DB. Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy treatment response and detection. In: Weissleder R, Ross BD, Rehemtulla A, Gambhir SS (eds). Molecular Imaging, principles and practice. PMPH-USA 2010.
30. Glunde K, Artemov D, Penet M-F, Jacobs MA, Bhujwalla ZM. Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy in metabolic and molecular imaging, and diagnosis of cancer. Chem Rev 2010; 110: 3043-59.
31. García-Gómez JM. Brain tumor classification using Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy. Tumor Central Nervous System 2011; 3: 5-19.
32. Villeirs GM, Oosterlinck W, Vanherreweghe E, De Meerleer GO. A qualitative approach to combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Eu J Rad 2010; 73: 352-6.
33. Casciaro S, Conversano F. Non invasive therapies of the future: micro and nano-systems for diagnosis and therapy. In: Casciaro S, Samset E (eds.). Minimally invasive technologies and nanosystems for diagnosis and therapies. Lecce: Lupiensis Biomedical Publications, 2008, p. 113-127.
34. Na HB, Song IC, Hyeon T. Inorganic nanoparticles for MRI contrast agents. Adv Mater 2009; 21: 2133-48.
35. Taylor KML, Kim JS, Rieter WJ, et al. Mesoporous silica nanospheres as highly efficient MRI contrast agents. J Am Chem Soc 2008; 130: 2154-5. (Pubitemid 351287981)
36. Manus LM, Mastarone DJ, Waters EA, et al. Gd(III)- nanodiamond conjugates for MRI contrast enhancement. Nano Lett 2010; 10: 484-9.
37. Corot C, Robert P, Idee JM, et al. Recent advances in iron oxide nanocrystal technology for medical imaging. Adv Drug Delivery Rev 2006; 58: 1471-504. (Pubitemid 44820503)
38. Semelka RC, Helmberger TKJ. Contrast agents for MR imaging of the liver. Radiology 2001; 218: 27-38.
39. Jaffer FA, Libby P, Weissleder R. Molecular and cellular imaging of atherosclerosis: emerging applications. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 47: 1328-38.
40. Sosnovik DE, Nahrendorf M, Weissleder R. Magnetic nanoparticles for MR imaging: agents, techniques and cardiovascular applications. Basic Res Cardiol 2008; 103: 122-30. (Pubitemid 351356755)
41. Weissleder R, Pittet MJ. Imaging in the era of molecular oncology. Nature 2008; 452: 580-9. (Pubitemid 351483372)
42. Jaffer FA, Libby P, Weissleder R. Molecular imaging of cardiovascular disease. Circulation 2007; 116: 1052-61. (Pubitemid 47329570)
43. Suzuki Y, Cunningham CH, Noguchi KI, et al. In vivo serial evaluation of superparamagnetic iron-oxide labeled stem cells by off-resonance positive contrast. Magn Reson Med 2008; 60: 1269-75.
44. Alric C, Taleb J, Le Due G, et al. Gadolinium chelate coated gold nanoparticles as contrast agents for both x-ray computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Chem Soc 2008; 130: 5908-15.
45. Figuerola A, Fiore A, Di Corato R, et al. One-pot synthesis and characterization of size-controlled bimagnetic FePt-iron oxide heterodimer nanocrystals. J Am Chem Soc 2008; 130: 1477-87. (Pubitemid 351171026)
46. Villanueva FS. Molecular imaging of cardiovascular disease using ultrasound. J Nucl Cardiol 2008; 15: 576-86. (Pubitemid 352044847)
47. Conversano F, Casciaro S. Last advances in ultrasound molecular imaging. In: Casciaro S, Gersak B (eds). New technology frontiers in minimally invasive therapies. Lecce: Lupiensis Biomedical Publications, 2007, pp. 161-171.
48. Kaufmann BA, Lindner JR. Molecular imaging with targeted contrast ultrasound. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2007; 18: 11-6. (Pubitemid 46237740)
49. Kindberg GM, Tolleshaug H, Roos N, et al. Hepatic clearance of Sonazoid perfluorobutane microbubbles by Kupffer cells does not reduce the ability of liver to phagocytose or degrade albumin microspheres. Cell Tissue Res 2003; 312: 49-54. (Pubitemid 36578845)
50. Kitamura H, Kawasaki S, Nakajima K, et al. Correlation between microbubble contrast-enhanced color Doppler sonography and immunostaining for Kupffer cells in assessing the histopathologic grade of hepatocellular carcinoma: preliminary results. J Clin Ultrasound 2002; 30: 465-71.
51. Bryant TH, Blomley MJ, Albrecht T, et al. Improved characterization of liver lesions with liver-phase uptake of liver-specific microbubbles: prospective multicenter study. Radiology 2004; 232: 799-809. (Pubitemid 39100266)
52. Von Herbay A, Haeussinger D, Gregor M, et al. Characterization and detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): comparison of the ultrasound contrast agents SonoVue (BR 1) and Levovist (SH U 508A). Ultraschall Med 2007; 28: 168-75. (Pubitemid 46732447)
53. Jang HJ, Kim TK, Wilson SR. Imaging of malignant liver masses: characterization and detection. Ultrasound Q 2006; 22: 19-29. (Pubitemid 44510224)
54. Kim TK, Jang HJ, Wilson SR. Benign liver masses: imaging with microbubble contrast agents. Ultrasound Q 2006; 22: 31-9. (Pubitemid 44510225)
55. Willmann JK, Lutz AM, Paulmurugan R, et al. Dual-targeted contrast agent for US assessment of tumor angiogenesis in vivo. Radiology 2008; 248: 936-44.
56. Palmowski M, Huppert J, Ladewig G, et al. Molecular profiling of angiogenesis with targeted ultrasound imaging: early assessment of antiangiogenic therapy effects. Mol Cancer Ther 2008; 7: 101-9.
57. Palmowski M, Peschke P, Huppert J, et al. Molecular ultrasound imaging of early vascular response in prostate tumors irradiated with carbon ions. Neoplasia 2009; 11: 856-63.
58. Hu G, Liu C, Liao Y, et al. Ultrasound molecular imaging of arterial thrombi with novel microbubbles modified by cyclic RGD in vitro and in vivo. Thromb Haemost 2011, in corso di stampa.
59. Hobbs SK, Monsky WL, Yuan F, et al. Regulation of transport pathways in tumor vessels: role of tumor type and microenvironment. PNAS 1998; 95: 4607-12. (Pubitemid 28207960)
60. Maeda H, Wu J, Sawa T, et al. Tumor vascular permeability and the EPR effect in macromolecular therapeutics: a review. J Control Release 2000; 65: 271-84. (Pubitemid 30122932)
61. Buchanan KD, Huang S, Kim H, et al. Echogenic liposome compositions for increased retention of ultrasound reflectivity at physiologic temperature. J Pharm Sci 2008; 97: 2242-9.
62. Dayton PA, Zhao S, Bloch SH, et al. Application of ultrasound to selectively localize nanodroplets for targeted imaging and therapy. Mol Imaging 2006; 5: 160-74.
63. Wheatley MA, Forsberg F, Dube N, et al. Surfactant-stabilized contrast agent on the nanoscale for diagnostic ultrasound imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol 2006; 32: 83-93. (Pubitemid 41814864)
64. Liu J, Levine AL, Mattoon JS, et al. Nanoparticles as image enhancing agents for ultrasonography. Phys Med Biol 2006; 51: 2179-89.
65. Liu J, Li J, Rosol TJ, et al. Biodegradable nanoparticles for targeted ultrasound imaging of breast cancer cells in vitro. Phys Med Biol 2007; 52: 4739-47. (Pubitemid 47232284)
66. Casciaro S, Conversano F, Ragusa A, et al. Optimal enhancement configuration of silica nanoparticles for ultrasound imaging and automatic detection at conventional diagnostic frequencies. Invest Radiol 2010; 45: 715-24.
67. Malvindi MA, Greco A, Conversano F, et al. Magnetic/silica nanocomposites as dual-mode contrast agents for combined magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography. Adv Funct Mater 2011; 21: 2548-55.
68. Jin Y, Kannan S, Wu M, et al. Toxicity of luminescent silica nanoparticles to living cells. Chem Res Toxicol 2007; 20: 1126-33. (Pubitemid 47372991)
69. Barbè C, Bartlett J, Kong L, et al. Silica particles: a novel drug-delivery system. Adv Funct Mater 2004; 16: 1959-66.
70. Piao Y, Burns A, Kim J, et al. Designed fabrication of silica-based nanostructured particle systems for nanomedicine applications. Adv Funct Mater 2008; 18: 3745-58.
71. Moulari B, Pertuit D, Pellequer Y, et al. The targeting of surface modified silica nanoparticles to infame tissue in experimental colitis. Biomaterials 2008; 29: 4554-60.
72. Roy I, Ohulchanskyy TY, Bharali DJ, et al. Optical tracking of organically modified silica nanoparticles as DNA carriers: a nonviral, nanomedicine approach for gene delivery. PNAS 2005; 102: 279-84. (Pubitemid 40116758)
73. Rutten A, Prokop M. Contrast agents in X-ray Computed Tomography and its application in oncology. Anti-Cancer Agents Med Chem 2007; 7: 307-16. (Pubitemid 46813467)
74. Wang H, Zheng L, Peng C, et al. Computed tomography imaging of cancer cells using acetylated dendrimer-entrapped gold nanoparticles. Biomaterials 2011; 32: 2979-88.
75. Daniel M-C, Aras O, Smith MF, Fleiter T, Nan A. Targeted in-vivo computed tomography imaging of tissue ACE using concentrated lisinopril-capped gold nanoparticle solutions. Proc SPIE 2010; 76740J.
76. Naylor LH. Reporter gene technology: the future looks bright. Biochem Pharm 1999; 58: 749-57. (Pubitemid 29329523)
77. Wu JC, Sundaresan G, Iyer M, Gambhir SS. Noninvasive optical imaging of firefly luciferase reporter gene expression in skeletal muscles of living mice. Mol Ther 2001; 4: 297-306. (Pubitemid 33040513)
78. Manicassamy B, Manicassamy S, Belicha-Villanueva A, Pisanelli G, Pulendran B, García-Sastre A. Analysis of in vivo dynamics of influenza virus infection in mice using a GFP reporter virus. PNAS 2010; 107: 11531-6.
79. Graves EE, Weissleder R, Ntziachristos V. Fluorescence molecular imaging of small animal tumor models. Curr Mol Med 2004; 4: 419-30. (Pubitemid 38787010)
80. Schellenberger EA, Weissleder R, Josephson L. Optimal modification of annexin V with fluorescent dyes. Chem Bio Chem 2004; 5: 271-4. (Pubitemid 39257119)
81. Rosenthal EL, Kulbersh BD, Duncan RD, et al. In vivo detection of head and neck cancer orthotopic xenografts by immunofluorescence. Laryngoscope 2006; 116: 1636-41. (Pubitemid 44368086)
82. Michalet X, Pinaud FF, Bentolila LA, et al. Quantum dots for live cells, in vivo imaging, and diagnostics. Science 2005; 307: 538-44. (Pubitemid 40165671)
83. Hardman R. A toxicologic review of quantum dots: toxicity depends on physicochemical and environmental factors. Environ Health Perspect 2006; 114: 165-72. (Pubitemid 43193634)
84. Agdeppa ED, Spilker ME. A review of imaging agent development. AAPS J 2009; 11: 286-99.
85. Marik J, Sanabria Bohorquez SM, Williams S-P, van Bruggen N. New imaging paradigms in drug development: the PET imaging approach. Drug Disc Today: Technol doi: 10.1016/j.ddtec.2011.11.004
86. Wangler C, Schirrmacher R, Bartenstein P, Wangler B. Click-chemistry reactions in radiopharmaceutical chemistry: fast & easy introduction of radiolabels into biomolecules for in vivo imaging. Curr Med Chem 2010; 17: 1092-116.
87. Pascali G, Mazzone G, Saccomanni G, Manera C, Salvadori PA. Microfluidic approach for fast labeling optimization and dose-on-demand implementation. Nucl Med Biol 2010; 37: 547-55.
88. Welch MJ, Hawker CJ, Wooley KL. The advantages of nanoparticles for PET. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 1743-6.
89. Devaraj NK, Keliher EJ, Thurber GM, Nahrendorf M, Weissleder R. 18F labeled nanoparticles for in vivo PET-CT imaging. Bioconjugate Chem 2009; 20: 397-401.
90. Plotkin M, Gneveckow U, Meier-Hauff K, et al. 18F-FET PET for planning of thermotherapy using magnetic nanoparticles in recurrent glioblastoma. Int J Hyperth 2006; 22: 319-25. (Pubitemid 43878854)
91. Rinne JO, Brooks DJ, Rossor MN, et al. 11C-PiB PET assessment of change in fibrillar amyloid-beta load in patients with Alzheimer's disease treated with bapineuzumab: a phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled, ascending-dose study. Lancet Neurol 2010; 9: 363-72.
92. Dhar S, Liu Z, Thomale J, Dai H, Lippard SJ. Targeted single-wall carbon nanotube-mediated Pt(IV) prodrug delivery using folate as a homing device. J Am Chem Soc 2008; 130: 11467-76.
93. Weissleder R, Tung CH, Mahmood U, et al. In vivo imaging of tumors with protease-activated near-infrared fluorescent probes. Nat Biotechnol 1999; 17: 375-8. (Pubitemid 29166041)
94. Prescher JA, Bertozzi CR. Chemistry in living systems. Nature Chem Biol 2005; 1: 13-21.
95. Evans HL, Slade RL, Carroll L, et al. Copper-free click: a promising tool for pre-targeted PET imaging. Chem Commun 2012; 48: 991-3.
96. Schoffelen R, Sharkey RM, Goldenberg DM, et al. Pretargeted immuno-positron emission tomography imaging of carcinoembryonic antigen-expressing tumors with a bispecific antibody and a 68Ga-and 18F-labeled hapten peptide in mice with human tumor xenografts. Mol Cancer Ther 2010; 9: 1019-27.
97. Van Bruggen N, Fine BM, Rudin M. Molecular and functional imaging in drug development. In: Weissleder R, Ross BD, Rehemtulla A, Gambhir SS (eds). Molecular Imaging, principles and practice. PMPH-USA 2010.
98. Oberdörster G, Stone V, Donaldson K. Toxicology of nanoparticles: a historical perspective. Nanotoxicology 2007; 1: 2-25. (Pubitemid 46570244)