Impact of a multiple mice holder on quantitation of high-throughput micropet imaging with and without ct attenuation correction

Molecular Imaging and Biology

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 569-575

  Habte, Frezghi ^a,b   Ren, Gang ^a,b,c   Doyle, Timothy C ^a   Liu, Hongguang ^a,b   Cheng, Zhen ^a,b   Paik, David S ^a,b  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Radiology ^*  (United States)

^c CellSight Technologies   (United States)

Author keywords

Attenuation correction; Biodistribution; High throughput; Image quantitation; Imaging; MicroPET

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GB 170 CU 64; TRACER; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG DOSE COMPARISON; DRUG HALF LIFE; DRUG UPTAKE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EX VIVO STUDY; FEMALE; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MICROPOSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; MOUSE; MULTIPLE MICE HOLDER; NONHUMAN; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION ATTENUATION; RADIATION EQUIPMENT; RADIOISOTOPE DECAY; RADIOLOGY PHANTOM; REFERENCE VALUE; TUMOR XENOGRAFT; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ANIMALIA; MUS;

ANIMALS; CALIBRATION; FEMALE; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MICE; MICE, NUDE; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84885307402     PISSN: 15361632     EISSN: 18602002     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11307-012-0602-y     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Henkelman M (2010) Systems biology through mouse imaging centers: experience and new directions. Ann Rev Biomed Eng 12:143-166
2. Agdeppa ED, Spilker ME (2009) A review of imaging agent development. The AAPS Journal 11:286-299
3. Hargreaves RJ (2008) The role of molecular imaging in drug discovery and development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 83:349-353
4. Ahn BC (2011) Applications of molecular imaging in drug discovery and development process. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 12:459-468
5. Medarova Z, Pham W, Kim Y, Dai G, Moore A (2006) In vivo imaging of tumor response to therapy using a dual-modality imaging strategy. Int J Cancer 118:2796-2802
6. Michalski MH, Chen X (2011) Molecular imaging in cancer treatment. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:358-377
7. Pike LS, Tannous BA, Deliolanis NC et al (2011) Imaging gene delivery in a mouse model of congenital neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis. Gene Ther 18:1173-1178
8. Yong J, Rasooly J, Dang H et al (2011) Multimodality imaging of B-cells in mouse models of type I and II diabetes. Diabetes 60:1383-1392
9. Lyons S (2005) Advances in imaging mouse tumour models in vivo. Journal of Pathology 205:194-205
10. Golestani R, Wu C, Tio RA et al (2010) Small-animal SPECT and SPECT/CT: application in cardiovascular research. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37:1766-1777
11. Roncali E, Cherry SR (2011) Application of silicon photomultipliers to positron emission tomography. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 39:1358-1377
12. Hamilton CS, Ma Y, Smith SD, Benveniste H (2007) High resolution 3D in vivo mouse brain imaging at 9.4 T bruker MRI systemBioengineering Conference, 2007 NEBC '07 IEEE 33rd Annual Northeast, pp. 45-46.
13. Hong H, Yang Y, Cai W (2011) Imaging gene expression in live cells and tissues. Cold Spring Harbor Protoc: 354-365.
14. Kluanberg BA, Davis JA (2008) Considerations for laboratory animal imaging center design and setup. ILAR J 49:4-16
15. Pauux AL, Ong LC, Teh I, et. al. (2011) Comparison of imaging techniques to monitor tumor growth and cancer progression in living animals. Int J Mol Imaging doi: 10.1155/2011/321538.
16. Chen TE, Yoder KK, Normandin MD et al (2009) A rat head holder for simultaneous scanning of two rats in small animal PET scanners: design, construction, feasibility testing and kinetic validation. J Neurosci Methods 176:24-33
17. Bock NA, Konyer NB, Henkelman RM (2003) Multiple-mouse MRI. Magnetic Resonance Med 49:158-167
18. Dazai J, Spring S, Cahill LS, Henkelman RM (2011) Multiple-mouse neuroanatomical magnetic resonance imaging. J Vis Exp: e2497.
19. Siepel FJ, Van Lier MGJTB, Chen M et al (2010) Scanning multiple mice in a small-animal PET scanner: influence on image quality. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 621:605-610
20. Disselhorst JA, Boerman OC, Oyen WJG, Slump CH, Visser EP (2010) Spatial resolution of the Inveon small-animal PET scanner for the entire field of view. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 615:245-248
21. Aide N, Cd D, Ml B, Meryet-Figuiere M, Poulain L (2010) High-throughput small animal PET imaging in cancer research: evaluation of the capability of the Inveon scanner to image four mice simultaneously. Nuclear Medicine Communications 31:851-858
22. Sheruma N, Peter LK, Wencke L, Steven R M (2006) Maximizing the useful field of view of the microPET: feasibility of imaging large animals, IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record 1853-1856
23. Aide N, Visser P, Lheureux S, Heutte N, Szanda I, Hicks R (2012) The motivations and methodology for high-throughput PET imaging of small animals in cancer research. Eur J Nucl Med Imaging 30:1497-1509
24. 64Cu-labeled activity-based probe. PLoS ONE 6:e28029
25. Srinivas M, Dhurairaj T, Basu S, Bural G, Surti S, Alavi A (2009) A recovery coefficient method for partial volume correction of PET images. Ann Nucl Med 23:341-348