The Potential of Hyperpolarized 13C MRI in Assessing Signaling Pathways in Cancer

Academic Radiology

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 215-222

  Zhang, Huiming ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer genomics driven approach; Cancer metabolism; Hyperpolarized 13C MRI; Metabolic imaging; Signaling pathways

Indexed keywords

BICARBONATE; CARBON 13; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; FUMARIC ACID; GLUCOSE; MITOGEN ACTIVATED PROTEIN KINASE; PHOSPHATIDYLINOSITOL 3 KINASE; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; PROTEIN KINASE B; PYRUVIC ACID; RAF PROTEIN; UREA;

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; CARBON NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; CARCINOGENESIS; ENZYME ACTIVITY; GENE MAPPING; GENE MUTATION; GENOMICS; HUMAN; HYPERPOLARIZATION; IMAGING SYSTEM; ISOTOPE LABELING; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; METABOLIC IMAGING; METABOLISM; NEOPLASM; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ONCOGENE; PHENOTYPE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; TUMOR GROWTH; TUMOR XENOGRAFT;

CANCER GENOMICS-DRIVEN APPROACH; CANCER METABOLISM; HYPERPOLARIZED (13)C MRI; METABOLIC IMAGING; SIGNALING PATHWAYS;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; CARBON ISOTOPES; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NEOPLASM PROTEINS; NEOPLASMS; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

EID: 84892473174     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: 18784046     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2013.11.015     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Ardenkjaer-Larsen J.H., Fridlund B., Gram A., et al. Increase in signal-to-noise ratio of > 10,000 times in liquid-state NMR. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:10158-10163.
2. Kurhanewicz J., Vigneron D.B., Brindle K., et al. Analysis of cancer metabolism by imaging hyperpolarized nuclei: prospects for translation to clinical research. Neoplasia 2011, 13:81-97.
3. Nelson S.J., Kurhanewicz J., Vigneron D.B., et al. Metabolic imaging of patients with prostate cancer using hyperpolarized [1-(13)C]pyruvate. Sci Transl Med 2013, 5:198-208.
4. Vogelstein B., Papadopoulos N., Velculescu V.E., et al. Cancer genome landscapes. Science 2013, 339:1546-1558.
5. Yap T.A., Omlin A., de Bono J.S. Development of therapeutic combinations targeting major cancer signaling pathways. J Clin Oncol 2013, 31:1592-1605.
6. Garraway L.A. Genomics-driven oncology: framework for an emerging paradigm. J Clin Oncol 2013, 31:1806-1814.
7. Garay J.P., Gray J.W. Omics and therapy: a basis for precision medicine. Mol Oncol 2012, 6:128-139.
8. Jones R.G., Thompson C.B. Tumor suppressors and cell metabolism: a recipe for cancer growth. Genes Dev 2009, 23:537-548.
9. Ward P.S., Thompson C.B. Metabolic reprogramming: a cancer hallmark even Warburg did not anticipate. Cancer Cell 2012, 21:297-308.
10. DeBerardinis R.J., Thompson C.B. Cellular metabolism and disease: what do metabolic outliers teach usα. Cell 2012, 148:1132-1144.
11. Kroemer G., Pouyssegur J. Tumor cell metabolism: cancer's Achilles' heel. Cancer Cell 2008, 13:472-482.
12. Cairns R.A., Harris I.S., Mak T.W. Regulation of cancer cell metabolism. Nat Rev Cancer 2011, 11:85-95.
13. Brindle K. Watching tumours gasp and die with MRI: the promise of hyperpolarised 13C MR spectroscopic imaging. Br J Radiol 2012, 85:697-708.
14. Nelson S.J., Ozhinsky E., Li Y., et al. Strategies for rapid in vivo 1H and hyperpolarized 13C MR spectroscopic imaging. J Magn Reson 2013, 229:187-197.
15. Dang C.V. MYC on the path to cancer. Cell 2012, 149:22-35.
16. Linehan W.M., Srinivasan R., Schmidt L.S. The genetic basis of kidney cancer: a metabolic disease. Nat Rev Urol 2010, 7:277-285.
17. Condeelis J., Weissleder R. In vivo imaging in cancer. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2010, 2:a003848.
18. James M.L., Gambhir S.S. A molecular imaging primer: modalities, imaging agents, and applications. Physiol Rev 2012, 92:897-965.
19. Wistuba I.I., Gelovani J.G., Jacoby J.J., et al. Methodological and practical challenges for personalized cancer therapies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011, 8:135-141.
20. Dafni H., Larson P.E., Hu S., et al. Hyperpolarized 13C spectroscopic imaging informs on hypoxia-inducible factor-1 and myc activity downstream of platelet-derived growth factor receptor. Cancer Res 2010, 70:7400-7410.
21. Chaumeil M.M., Ozawa T., Park I., et al. Hyperpolarized 13C MR spectroscopic imaging can be used to monitor everolimus treatment in vivo in an orthotopic rodent model of glioblastoma. NeuroImage 2012, 59:193-201.
22. Lodi A., Woods S.M., Ronen S.M. Treatment with the MEK inhibitor U0126 induces decreased hyperpolarized pyruvate to lactate conversion in breast, but not prostate, cancer cells. NMR Biomed 2013, 26:299-306.
23. Hu S., Balakrishnan A., Bok R.A., et al. 13C-pyruvate imaging reveals alterations in glycolysis that precede c-Myc-induced tumor formation and regression. Cell Metab 2011, 14:131-142.
24. Dutta P., Le A., Vander Jagt D.L., et al. Evaluation of LDH-A and glutaminase inhibition in vivo by hyperpolarized 13C-pyruvate magnetic resonance spectroscopy of tumors. Cancer Res 2013, 73:4190-4195.
25. Bohndiek S.E., Kettunen M.I., Hu D.E., et al. Hyperpolarized (13)C spectroscopy detects early changes in tumor vasculature and metabolism after VEGF neutralization. Cancer Res 2012, 72:854-864.
26. Ardenkjaer-Larsen J.H., Leach A.M., Clarke N., et al. Dynamic nuclear polarization polarizer for sterile use intent. NMR Biomed 2011, 24:927-932.
27. Hu S., Larson P.E., Vancriekinge M., et al. Rapid sequential injections of hyperpolarized [1-(1)(3)C]pyruvate in vivo using a sub-kelvin, multi-sample DNP polarizer. Magn Reson Imaging 2013, 31:490-496.
28. Wilson D.M., Keshari K.R., Larson P.E., et al. Multi-compound polarization by DNP allows simultaneous assessment of multiple enzymatic activities in vivo. J Magn Reson 2010, 205:141-147.
29. Meier S., Karlsson M., Jensen P.R., et al. Metabolic pathway visualization in living yeast by DNP-NMR. Mol Biosyst 2011, 7:2834-2836.
30. Ohliger M.A., Larson P.E., Bok R.A., et al. Combined parallel and partial fourier MR reconstruction for accelerated 8-channel hyperpolarized carbon-13 in vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI). J Magn Reson Imaging 2013, 38:701-713.
31. Keshari K.R., Sriram R., Van Criekinge M., et al. Metabolic reprogramming and validation of hyperpolarized (13) C lactate as a prostate cancer biomarker using a human prostate tissue slice culture bioreactor. Prostate 2013, 73:1171-1181.
32. Li L.Z., Kadlececk S., Xu H.N., et al. Ratiometric analysis in hyperpolarized NMR (I): test of the two-site exchange model and the quantification of reaction rate constants. NMR Biomed 2013, 26:1308-1320.
33. Swisher C.L., Larson P.E., Kruttwig K., et al. Quantitative measurement of cancer metabolism using stimulated echo hyperpolarized carbon-13 MRS. Magn Reson Med 2013, Feb 14, [Epub ahead of print].
34. Heiser L.M., Sadanandam A., Kuo W.L., et al. Subtype and pathway specific responses to anticancer compounds in breast cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012, 109:2724-2729.
35. Woodcock J., Griffin J.P., Behrman R.E. Development of novel combination therapies. N Engl J Med 2011, 364:985-987.
36. Ding L., Ley T.J., Larson D.E., et al. Clonal evolution in relapsed acute myeloid leukaemia revealed by whole-genome sequencing. Nature 2012, 481:506-510.
37. Gerlinger M., Rowan A.J., Horswell S., et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N Engl J Med 2012, 366:883-892.
38. Marusyk A., Polyak K. Tumor heterogeneity: causes and consequences. Biochim Biophys Acta 2010, 1805:105-117.
39. Engelman J.A. Targeting PI3K signalling in cancer: opportunities, challenges and limitations. Nat Rev Cancer 2009, 9:550-562.
40. Grinde M.T., Moestue S.A., Borgan E., et al. 13C high-resolution-magic angle spinning MRS reveals differences in glucose metabolism between two breast cancer xenograft models with different gene expression patterns. NMR Biomed 2011, 24:1243-1252.
41. Perou C.M., Borresen-Dale A.L. Systems biology and genomics of breast cancer. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2011, 3.
42. Van Dyke T., Jacks T. Cancer modeling in the modern era: progress and challenges. Cell 2002, 108:135-144.
43. Cheon D.J., Orsulic S. Mouse models of cancer. Annu Rev Pathol 2011, 6:95-119.
44. Tentler J.J., Tan A.C., Weekes C.D., et al. Patient-derived tumour xenografts as models for oncology drug development. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2012, 9:338-350.
45. Sharpless N.E., Depinho R.A. The mighty mouse: genetically engineered mouse models in cancer drug development. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006, 5:741-754.
46. Singh M., Murriel C.L., Johnson L. Genetically engineered mouse models: closing the gap between preclinical data and trial outcomes. Cancer Res 2012, 72:2695-2700.
47. Nardella C., Lunardi A., Patnaik A., et al. The APL paradigm and the "co-clinical trial" project. Cancer Discov 2011, 1:108-116.
48. Chen Z., Cheng K., Walton Z., et al. A murine lung cancer co-clinical trial identifies genetic modifiers of therapeutic response. Nature 2012, 483:613-617.