Nanobody: The "magic bullet" for molecular imaging?

Theranostics

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 386-398

  Chakravarty, Rubel ^a,b   Goel, Shreya ^c   Cai, Weibo ^a,c,d,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b BHABHA ATOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE   (India)

^c University of Wisconsin Madison   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Arthritis; Atherosclerosis; Cancer; Molecular imaging; Nanobody; Positron emission tomography (PET)

Indexed keywords

ANTIBODY; CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN; COPPER 64; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2 ANTIBODY; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR ANTIBODY; FLUORINE 18; GALLIUM 68; MACROPHAGE MANNOSE RECEPTOR; MANNOSE RECEPTOR; MEMBRANE PROTEIN; NANOBODY; RADIOISOTOPE; SCATTER FACTOR; TECHNETIUM 99M; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VASCULAR CELL ADHESION MOLECULE 1; VASCULAR CELL ADHESION MOLECULE 1 ANTIBODY; ZIRCONIUM 89;

ANTIGEN BINDING; ANTIGEN EXPRESSION; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COLON ADENOCARCINOMA; COMPLEMENTARITY DETERMINING REGION; DRUG CLEARANCE; DRUG HALF LIFE; DRUG TUMOR LEVEL; FLUORESCENCE IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; ISOTOPE LABELING; MOLECULAR CLONING; MOLECULAR IMAGING; MOLECULAR PROBE; MOLECULAR SIZE; MOLECULAR STABILITY; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; NONHUMAN; OPTICAL RESOLUTION; PLASMA CLEARANCE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REVIEW; SCINTISCANNING; SIGNAL DETECTION; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; SOLUBILITY; TUMOR BIOPSY; TUMOR VOLUME; ULTRASOUND;

ARTHRITIS; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CANCER; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NANOBODY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY (PET);

ANIMALS; CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN; HEPATOCYTE GROWTH FACTOR; HUMANS; LECTINS, C-TYPE; MANNOSE-BINDING LECTINS; MOLECULAR IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RECEPTOR, EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR; RECEPTORS, CELL SURFACE; SINGLE-DOMAIN ANTIBODIES;

EID: 84902479571     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18387640     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7150/thno.8006     Document Type: Review

References (117)

1. Cassidy PJ, Radda GK. Molecular imaging perspectives. J R Soc Interface. 2005; 2: 133-44.
2. Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging of cancer with positron emission tomography. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002; 2: 683-93.
3. Herschman HR. Molecular imaging: looking at problems, seeing solutions. Science. 2003; 302: 605-8.
4. Baum RP, Kulkarni HR. THERANOSTICS: From Molecular Imaging Using Ga-68 Labeled Tracers and PET/CT to Personalized Radionuclide Therapy -The Bad Berka Experience. Theranostics. 2012; 2: 437-47.
5. Velikyan I. Molecular imaging and radiotherapy: theranostics for personalized patient management. Theranostics. 2012; 2: 424-6.
6. Weissleder R, Pittet MJ. Imaging in the era of molecular oncology. Nature. 2008; 452: 580-9.
7. Hoffman JM, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging: the vision and opportunity for radiology in the future. Radiology. 2007; 244: 39-47.
8. Massoud TF, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging in living subjects: seeing fundamental biological processes in a new light. Genes Dev. 2003; 17: 545-80.
9. Nolting DD, Nickels ML, Guo N, Pham W. Molecular imaging probe development:a chemistry perspective. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 2:273-306.
10. van Dongen GA, Ussi AE, de Man FH, Migliaccio G. EATRIS, a European initiative to boost translational biomedical research. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013; 3: 166-74.
11. Wu Y, Zhang W, Li J, Zhang Y. Optical imaging of tumor microenvironment. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013; 3: 1-15.
12. Pichler BJ, Wehrl HF, Judenhofer MS. Latest advances in molecular imaging instrumentation. J Nucl Med. 2008; 49 Suppl 2: 5S-23S.
13. Jennings LE, Long NJ. 'Two is better than one'--probes for dual-modality molecular imaging. Chem Commun (Camb). 2009;: 3511-24.
14. Menon JU, Gulaka PK, McKay MA, Geethanath S, Liu L, Kodibagkar VD. Dual-modality, dual-functional nanoprobes for cellular and molecular imaging. Theranostics. 2012; 2: 1199-207.
15. Balyasnikova S, Lofgren J, de Nijs R, Zamogilnaya Y, Hojgaard L, Fischer BM. PET/MR in oncology: an introduction with focus on MR and future perspectives for hybrid imaging. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 2: 458-74.
16. Cai W, Hong H. In a "nutshell": intrinsically radio-labeled quantum dots. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 2: 136-40.
17. Rischpler C, Nekolla SG, Beer AJ. PET/MR imaging of atherosclerosis: initial experience and outlook. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013; 3: 393-6.
18. Wu AM. Engineered antibodies for molecular imaging of cancer. Methods. 2014; 65: 139-47.
19. Reubi JC, Maecke HR. Peptide-based probes for cancer imaging. J Nucl Med. 2008; 49: 1735-8.
20. Zhu L, Guo N, Li Q, Ma Y, Jacboson O, Lee S, et al. Dynamic PET and Optical Imaging and Compartment Modeling using a Dual-labeled Cyclic RGD Peptide Probe. Theranostics. 2012; 2: 746-56.
21. Cui M. Past and Recent Progress of Molecular Imaging Probes for beta-Amyloid Plaques in the Brain. Curr Med Chem. 2014; 21: 82-112.
22. Kim B, Yang J, Hwang M, Choi J, Kim HO, Jang E, et al. Aptamer-modified magnetic nanoprobe for molecular MR imaging of VEGFR2 on angiogenic vasculature. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2013; 8: 399.
23. Varmira K, Hosseinimehr SJ, Noaparast Z, Abedi SM. An improved radiolabelled RNA aptamer molecule for HER2 imaging in cancers. J Drug Target. 2014; 22: 116-22.
24. Olafsen T, Wu AM. Antibody vectors for imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 2010; 40:167-81.
25. Kaur S, Venktaraman G, Jain M, Senapati S, Garg PK, Batra SK. Recent trends in antibody-based oncologic imaging. Cancer Lett. 2012; 315: 97-111.
26. Holliger P, Hudson PJ. Engineered antibody fragments and the rise of single domains. Nat Biotechnol. 2005; 23: 1126-36.
27. Wu AM, Senter PD. Arming antibodies: prospects and challenges for immunoconjugates. Nat Biotechnol. 2005; 23: 1137-46.
28. Romer T, Leonhardt H, Rothbauer U. Engineering antibodies and proteins for molecular in vivo imaging. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2011; 22: 882-7.
29. Oliveira S, Heukers R, Sornkom J, Kok RJ, van Bergen En Henegouwen PM. Targeting tumors with nanobodies for cancer imaging and therapy. J Control Release. 2013;172: 607-17.
30. Schoonooghe S, Laoui D, Van Ginderachter JA, Devoogdt N, Lahoutte T, De Baetselier P, et al. Novel applications of nanobodies for in vivo bio-imaging of inflamed tissues in inflammatory diseases and cancer. Immunobiology. 2012; 217: 1266-72.
31. Devoogdt N, Xavier C, Hernot S, Vaneycken I, D'Huyvetter M, De Vos J, et al. Molecular imaging using Nanobodies: a case study. Methods Mol Biol. 2012; 911: 559-67.
32. De Groeve K, Deschacht N, De Koninck C, Caveliers V, Lahoutte T, Devoogdt N, et al. Nanobodies as tools for in vivo imaging of specific immune cell types. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51: 782-9.
33. De Vos J, Devoogdt N, Lahoutte T, Muyldermans S. Camelid single-domain antibody-fragment engineering for (pre)clinical in vivo molecular imaging applications: adjusting the bullet to its target. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2013; 13:1149-60.
34. Smolarek D, Bertrand O, Czerwinski M. Variable fragments of heavy chain antibodies (VHHs): a new magic bullet molecule of medicine? Postepy Hig Med Dosw (Online). 2012; 66: 348-58.
35. Revets H, De Baetselier P, Muyldermans S. Nanobodies as novel agents for cancer therapy. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2005; 5: 111-24.
36. Muyldermans S, Baral TN, Retamozzo VC, De Baetselier P, De Genst E, Kinne J, et al. Camelid immunoglobulins and nanobody technology. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2009; 128: 178-83.
37. Hassanzadeh-Ghassabeh G, Devoogdt N, De Pauw P, Vincke C, Muyldermans S. Nanobodies and their potential applications. Nanomedicine (Lond). 2013; 8:1013-26.
38. Vaneycken I, D'Huyvetter M, Hernot S, De Vos J, Xavier C, Devoogdt N, et al. Immuno-imaging using nanobodies. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2011; 22: 877-81.
39. Vincke C, Loris R, Saerens D, Martinez-Rodriguez S, Muyldermans S, Conrath K. General strategy to humanize a camelid single-domain antibody and identification of a universal humanized nanobody scaffold. J Biol Chem. 2009; 284:3273-84.
40. Harmsen MM, De Haard HJ. Properties, production, and applications of camelid single-domain antibody fragments. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2007; 77: 13-22.
41. Xavier C, Vaneycken I, D'Huyvetter M, Heemskerk J, Keyaerts M, Vincke C, et al. Synthesis, preclinical validation, dosimetry, and toxicity of 68Ga-NOTA-anti-HER2 Nanobodies for iPET imaging of HER2 receptor expression in cancer. J Nucl Med. 2013; 54: 776-84.
42. Huang L, Gainkam LO, Caveliers V, Vanhove C, Keyaerts M, De Baetselier P, et al. SPECT imaging with 99mTc-labeled EGFR-specific nanobody for in vivo monitoring of EGFR expression. Mol Imaging Biol. 2008; 10: 167-75.
43. Gainkam LO, Caveliers V, Devoogdt N, Vanhove C, Xavier C, Boerman O, et al. Localization, mechanism and reduction of renal retention of technetium-99m labeled epidermal growth factor receptor-specific nanobody in mice. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2011; 6: 85-92.
44. Vosjan MJ, Perk LR, Roovers RC, Visser GW, Stigter-van Walsum M, van Bergen En Henegouwen PM, et al. Facile labelling of an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor Nanobody with 68Ga via a novel bifunctional desferal chelate for immuno-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011; 38: 753-63.
45. Oliveira S, van Dongen GA, Stigter-van Walsum M, Roovers RC, Stam JC, Mali W, et al. Rapid visualization of human tumor xenografts through optical imaging with a near-infrared fluorescent anti-epidermal growth factor receptor nanobody. Mol Imaging. 2012; 11: 33-46.
46. Lemaire M, D'Huyvetter M, Lahoutte T, Van Valckenborgh E, Menu E, De Bruyne E, et al. Imaging and radioimmunotherapy of multiple myeloma with anti-idiotypic Nanobodies. Leukemia. 2013; ePub.
47. Ladenson RC, Crimmins DL, Landt Y, Ladenson JH. Isolation and characterization of a thermally stable recombinant anti-caffeine heavy-chain antibody fragment. Anal Chem. 2006; 78: 4501-8.
48. Muyldermans S. Nanobodies: natural single-domain antibodies. Annu Rev Biochem. 2013; 82: 775-97.
49. Wu TT, Johnson G, Kabat EA. Length distribution of CDRH3 in antibodies. Proteins. 1993; 16: 1-7.
50. Wesolowski J, Alzogaray V, Reyelt J, Unger M, Juarez K, Urrutia M, et al. Single domain antibodies: promising experimental and therapeutic tools in infection and immunity. Med Microbiol Immunol. 2009; 198: 157-74.
51. Zabetakis D, Anderson GP, Bayya N, Goldman ER. Contributions of the complementarity determining regions to the thermal stability of a single- domain antibody. PLoS One. 2013; 8: e77678.
52. Kuroda D, Shirai H, Jacobson MP, Nakamura H. Computer-aided antibody design. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2012; 25: 507-21.
53. Kijanka M, Warnders FJ, El Khattabi M, Lub-de Hooge M, van Dam GM, Ntziachristos V, et al. Rapid optical imaging of human breast tumour xenografts using anti-HER2 VHHs site-directly conjugated to IRDye 800CW for image-guided surgery. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013; 40: 1718-29.
54. Movahedi K, Schoonooghe S, Laoui D, Houbracken I, Waelput W, Breckpot K, et al. Nanobody-based targeting of the macrophage mannose receptor for effective in vivo imaging of tumor-associated macrophages. Cancer Res. 2012; 72: 4165-77.
55. Cortez-Retamozo V LT, Caveliers V, Gainkam LOT, Hernot S,. 99mTc-Labeled Nanobodies: A New Type of Targeted Probes for Imaging Antigen Expression. Current Radiopharm. 2008; 1: 37-41.
56. Vosjan MJ, Vercammen J, Kolkman JA, Stigter-van Walsum M, Revets H, van Dongen GA. Nanobodies targeting the hepatocyte growth factor: potential new drugs for molecular cancer therapy. Mol Cancer Ther. 2012; 11: 1017-25.
57. Tijink BM, Laeremans T, Budde M, Stigter-van Walsum M, Dreier T, de Haard HJ, et al. Improved tumor targeting of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor Nanobodies through albumin binding: taking advantage of modular Nanobody technology. Mol Cancer Ther. 2008; 7: 2288-97.
58. Jiang W, Rosenberg JN, Wauchope AD, Tremblay JM, Shoemaker CB, Weeks DP, et al. Generation of a phage-display library of single-domain camelid VH H antibodies directed against Chlamydomonas reinhardtii antigens, and characterization of VH Hs binding cell-surface antigens. Plant J. 2013; 76:709-17.
59. Vaneycken I, Devoogdt N, Van Gassen N, Vincke C, Xavier C, Wernery U, et al. Preclinical screening of anti-HER2 nanobodies for molecular imaging of breast cancer. FASEB J. 2011; 25: 2433-46.
60. Gomes CM, Abrunhosa AJ, Ramos P, Pauwels EK. Molecular imaging with SPECT as a tool for drug development. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2011; 63: 547-54.
61. Ametamey SM, Honer M, Schubiger PA. Molecular imaging with PET. Chem Rev. 2008; 108: 1501-16.
62. Alauddin MM. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with 18F-based radiotracers. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 2: 55-76.
63. Holland JP, Cumming P, Vasdev N. PET radiopharmaceuticals for probing enzymes in the brain. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013; 3: 194-216.
64. Eckelman WC. Unparalleled contribution of technetium-99m to medicine over 5 decades. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009; 2: 364-8.
65. Chakravarty R, Shukla R, Ram R, Venkatesh M, Dash A, Tyagi AK. Nanoceria-PAN composite-based advanced sorbent material: a major step forward in the field of clinical-grade 68Ge/68Ga generator. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2010; 2: 2069-75.
66. van der Meel R, Gallagher WM, Oliveira S, O'Connor AE, Schiffelers RM, Byrne AT. Recent advances in molecular imaging biomarkers in cancer: application of bench to bedside technologies. Drug Discov Today. 2010; 15:102-14.
67. James ML, Gambhir SS. A molecular imaging primer: modalities, imaging agents, and applications. Physiol Rev. 2012; 92: 897-965.
68. Hellebust A, Richards-Kortum R. Advances in molecular imaging: targeted optical contrast agents for cancer diagnostics. Nanomedicine (Lond). 2012; 7:429-45.
69. Luker GD, Luker KE. Optical imaging: current applications and future directions. J Nucl Med. 2008; 49: 1-4.
70. Ntziachristos V, Razansky D. Optical and opto-acoustic imaging. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2013; 187: 133-50.
71. van Dam GM, Themelis G, Crane LM, Harlaar NJ, Pleijhuis RG, Kelder W, et al. Intraoperative tumor-specific fluorescence imaging in ovarian cancer by folate receptor-alpha targeting: first in-human results. Nat Med. 2011; 17:1315-9.
72. Vahrmeijer AL, Hutteman M, van der Vorst JR, van de Velde CJ, Frangioni JV. Image-guided cancer surgery using near-infrared fluorescence. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013; 10: 507-18.
73. Postema M, Gilja OH. Contrast-enhanced and targeted ultrasound. World J Gastroenterol. 2011; 17: 28-41.
74. Lindner JR, Wei K. Contrast echocardiography. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2002; 27:454-519.
75. Neshat H, Cool DW, Barker K, Gardi L, Kakani N, Fenster A. A 3D ultrasound scanning system for image guided liver interventions. Med Phys. 2013; 40:112903.
76. Mui LW, Pursell LJ, Botwinick IC, Allendorf JD, Chabot JA, Newhouse JH. Routine intraoperative hepatic sonography does not affect staging or postsurgical hepatic recurrence in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Ultrasound Med. 2014; 33: 47-51.
77. Hernot S, Unnikrishnan S, Du Z, Shevchenko T, Cosyns B, Broisat A, et al. Nanobody-coupled microbubbles as novel molecular tracer. J Control Release. 2012; 158: 346-53.
78. Arteaga CL. Epidermal growth factor receptor dependence in human tumors:more than just expression? Oncologist. 2002; 7 Suppl 4: 31-9.
79. Cai W, Niu G, Chen X. Multimodality imaging of the HER-kinase axis in cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008; 35: 186-208.
80. Altintas I, Kok RJ, Schiffelers RM. Targeting epidermal growth factor receptor in tumors: from conventional monoclonal antibodies via heavy chain-only antibodies to nanobodies. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2012; 45: 399-407.
81. Gainkam LO, Huang L, Caveliers V, Keyaerts M, Hernot S, Vaneycken I, et al. Comparison of the biodistribution and tumor targeting of two 99mTc-labeled anti-EGFR nanobodies in mice, using pinhole SPECT/micro-CT. J Nucl Med. 2008; 49: 788-95.
82. Gainkam LO, Keyaerts M, Caveliers V, Devoogdt N, Vanhove C, Van Grunsven L, et al. Correlation between epidermal growth factor receptor- specific nanobody uptake and tumor burden: a tool for noninvasive monitoring of tumor response to therapy. Mol Imaging Biol. 2011; 13: 940-8.
83. Capala J, Bouchelouche K. Molecular imaging of HER2-positive breast cancer:a step toward an individualized 'image and treat' strategy. Curr Opin Oncol. 2010; 22: 559-66.
84. Niu G, Cai W, Chen X. Molecular imaging of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) expression. Front Biosci. 2008; 13: 790-805.
85. Pruszynski M, Koumarianou E, Vaidyanathan G, Revets H, Devoogdt N, Lahoutte T, et al. Targeting breast carcinoma with radioiodinated anti-HER2 Nanobody. Nucl Med Biol. 2013; 40: 52-9.
86. Nakamura T, Mizuno S. The discovery of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and its significance for cell biology, life sciences and clinical medicine. Proc Jpn Acad Ser B Phys Biol Sci. 2010; 86: 588-610.
87. Bottaro DP, Rubin JS, Faletto DL, Chan AM, Kmiecik TE, Vande Woude GF, et al. Identification of the hepatocyte growth factor receptor as the c-met proto- oncogene product. Science. 1991; 251: 802-4.
88. Birchmeier C, Birchmeier W, Gherardi E, Vande Woude GF. Met, metastasis, motility and more. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2003; 4: 915-25.
89. Leung K. 89Zr-Desferrioxamine p-isothiocyanatobenzyl-anti-hepatocyte growth factor nanobody 1E2 fused to albumin-binding nanobody Alb8. Molecular Imaging and Contrast Agent Database (MICAD). Bethesda MD; 2004.
90. Harris N, Super M, Rits M, Chang G, Ezekowitz RA. Characterization of the murine macrophage mannose receptor: demonstration that the downregulation of receptor expression mediated by interferon-gamma occurs at the level of transcription. Blood. 1992; 80: 2363-73.
91. Movahedi K, Laoui D, Gysemans C, Baeten M, Stange G, Van den Bossche J, et al. Different tumor microenvironments contain functionally distinct subsets of macrophages derived from Ly6C(high) monocytes. Cancer Res. 2010; 70:5728-39.
92. Kurachi T, Morita I, Oki T, Ueki T, Sakaguchi K, Enomoto S, et al. Expression on outer membranes of mannose residues, which are involved in osteoclast formation via cellular fusion events. J Biol Chem. 1994; 269: 17572-6.
93. Morishima S, Morita I, Tokushima T, Kawashima H, Miyasaka M, Omura K, et al. Expression and role of mannose receptor/terminal high-mannose type oligosaccharide on osteoclast precursors during osteoclast formation. J Endocrinol. 2003; 176: 285-92.
94. Maruotti N, Grano M, Colucci S, d'Onofrio F, Cantatore FP. Osteoclastogenesis and arthritis. Clin Exp Med. 2011; 11: 137-45.
95. Put S, Schoonooghe S, Devoogdt N, Schurgers E, Avau A, Mitera T, et al. SPECT imaging of joint inflammation with Nanobodies targeting the macrophage mannose receptor in a mouse model for rheumatoid arthritis. J Nucl Med. 2013; 54: 807-14.
96. Cybulsky MI, Fries JW, Williams AJ, Sultan P, Eddy R, Byers M, et al. Gene structure, chromosomal location, and basis for alternative mRNA splicing of the human VCAM1 gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1991; 88: 7859-63.
97. Cybulsky MI, Gimbrone MA, Jr. Endothelial expression of a mononuclear leukocyte adhesion molecule during atherogenesis. Science. 1991; 251: 788-91.
98. Li H, Cybulsky MI, Gimbrone MA, Jr., Libby P. An atherogenic diet rapidly induces VCAM-1, a cytokine-regulatable mononuclear leukocyte adhesion molecule, in rabbit aortic endothelium. Arterioscler Thromb. 1993; 13: 197-204.
99. Li H, Cybulsky MI, Gimbrone MA, Jr., Libby P. Inducible expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 by vascular smooth muscle cells in vitro and within rabbit atheroma. Am J Pathol. 1993; 143: 1551-9.
100. McAteer MA, Choudhury RP. Targeted molecular imaging of vascular inflammation in cardiovascular disease using nano- and micro-sized agents. Vascul Pharmacol. 2013; 58: 31-8.
101. Broisat A, Hernot S, Toczek J, De Vos J, Riou LM, Martin S, et al. Nanobodies targeting mouse/human VCAM1 for the nuclear imaging of atherosclerotic lesions. Circ Res. 2012; 110: 927-37.
102. Nahrendorf M, McCarthy JR, Libby P. Over a hump for imaging atherosclerosis:nanobodies visualize vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 in inflamed plaque. Circ Res. 2012; 110: 902-3.
103. Hong H, Sun J, Cai W. Radionuclide-Based Cancer Imaging Targeting the Carcinoembryonic Antigen. Biomark Insights. 2008; 3: 435-51.
104. Choi KY, Liu G, Lee S, Chen X. Theranostic nanoplatforms for simultaneous cancer imaging and therapy: current approaches and future perspectives. Nanoscale. 2012; 4: 330-42.
105. Xie J, Lee S, Chen X. Nanoparticle-based theranostic agents. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2010; 62: 1064-79.
106. Chen F, Ellison PA, Lewis CM, Hong H, Zhang Y, Shi S, et al. Chelator-Free Synthesis of a Dual-Modality PET/MRI Agent. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2013; 52: 13319-23.
107. Chen F, Hong H, Zhang Y, Valdovinos HF, Shi S, Kwon GS, et al. In vivo tumor targeting and image-guided drug delivery with antibody-conjugated, radiolabeled mesoporous silica nanoparticles. ACS Nano. 2013; 7: 9027-39.
108. Goel S, Chen F, Cai W. Synthesis and Biomedical Applications of Copper Sulfide Nanoparticles: From Sensors to Theranostics. Small. 2013; ePub.
109. Shi S, Chen F, Cai W. Biomedical applications of functionalized hollow mesoporous silica nanoparticles: focusing on molecular imaging. Nanomedicine (Lond). 2013; 8: 2027-39.
110. Yang K, Feng L, Hong H, Cai W, Liu Z. Preparation and functionalization of graphene nanocomposites for biomedical applications. Nat Protoc. 2013; 8:2392-403.
111. Sun Y, Zhu X, Peng J, Li F. Core-shell lanthanide upconversion nanophosphors as four-modal probes for tumor angiogenesis imaging. ACS Nano. 2013; 7: 11290-300.
112. Gong H, Peng R, Liu Z. Carbon nanotubes for biomedical imaging: The recent advances. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2013; 65: 1951-63.
113. Kim YH, Jeon J, Hong SH, Rhim WK, Lee YS, Youn H, et al. Tumor targeting and imaging using cyclic RGD-PEGylated gold nanoparticle probes with directly conjugated iodine-125. Small. 2011; 7: 2052-60.
114. Sharma A, Jain N, Sareen R. Nanocarriers for diagnosis and targeting of breast cancer. Biomed Res Int. 2013; 2013: 960821.
115. Yoo JW, Chambers E, Mitragotri S. Factors that control the circulation time of nanoparticles in blood: challenges, solutions and future prospects. Curr Pharm Des. 2010; 16: 2298-307.
116. Riehemann K, Schneider SW, Luger TA, Godin B, Ferrari M, Fuchs H. Nanomedicine-- challenge and perspectives. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2009; 48:872-97.
117. Sanhai WR, Sakamoto JH, Canady R, Ferrari M. Seven challenges for nanomedicine. Nat Nanotechnol. 2008; 3: 242-4.