Microscopic lymph node tumor burden quantified by macroscopic dual-tracer molecular imaging

Nature Medicine

Volumn 20, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 1348-1353

  Tichauer, Kenneth M ^a   Samkoe, Kimberley S ^b   Gunn, Jason R ^c   Kanick, Stephen C ^c   Hoopes, P Jack ^b,c   Barth, Richard J ^b   Kaufman, Peter A ^b   Hasan, Tayyaba ^d   Pogue, Brian W ^b,c,d  

^a Illinois Institute of Technology   (United States)

^b DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c DARTMOUTH COLLEGE   (United States)

^d MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; TRACER; FLUORESCENT DYE;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EX VIVO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; LYMPHOMA; MOLECULAR IMAGING; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; NUDE MOUSE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN TARGETING; TUMOR VOLUME; ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; HUMAN; KINETICS; LYMPH NODE; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; STAINING; TUMOR CELL LINE;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; CELL LINE, TUMOR; FLUORESCENT DYES; HUMANS; KINETICS; LYMPH NODES; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MICE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; STAINING AND LABELING; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 84922394898     PISSN: 10788956     EISSN: 1546170X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nm.3732     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Chen, S.L., Iddings, D.M., Scheri, R.P. & Bilchik, A.J. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node analysis: current concepts and applications. CA Cancer J. Clin. 56, 292–309; quiz 316–297 (2006).
2. Tobler, N.E. & Detmar, M. Tumor and lymph node lymphangiogenesis—impact on cancer metastasis. J. Leukoc. Biol. 80, 691–696 (2006).
3. Schrenk, P., Rieger, R., Shamiyeh, A. & Wayand, W. Morbidity following sentinel lymph node biopsy versus axillary lymph node dissection for patients with breast carcinoma. Cancer 88, 608–614 (2000).
4. Sampath, L., Wang, W. & Sevick-Muraca, E.M. Near infrared fluorescent optical imaging for nodal staging. J. Biomed. Opt. 13, 041312 (2008).
5. Reilly, R.M. et al. Problems of delivery of monoclonal antibodies. Pharmaceutical and pharmacokinetic solutions. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 28, 126–142 (1995).
6. Liu, J.T. et al. Quantifying cell-surface biomarker expression in thick tissues with ratiometric three-dimensional microscopy. Biophys. J. 96, 2405–2414 (2009).
7. Pogue, B.W. et al. Imaging targeted-agent binding in vivo with two probes. J. Biomed. Opt. 15, 030513 (2010).
8. Baeten, J., Haller, J., Shih, H. & Ntziachristos, V. In vivo investigation of breast cancer progression by use of an internal control. Neoplasia 11, 220–227 (2009).
9. Tichauer, K.M. et al. In vivo quantification of tumor receptor binding potential with dual-reporter molecular imaging. Mol. Imaging Biol. 14, 584–592 (2012).
10. Davis, S.C. et al. Dynamic dual-tracer MRI-guided fluorescence tomography to quantify receptor density in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 9025–9030 (2013).
11. Saltz, L.B. et al. Phase II trial of cetuximab in patients with refractory colorectal cancer that expresses the epidermal growth factor receptor. J. Clin. Oncol. 22, 1201–1208 (2004).
12. Nicholson, R.I., Gee, J.M. & Harper, M.E. EGFR and cancer prognosis. Eur. J. Cancer 37 (suppl. 4), S9–S15 (2001).
13. van Agthoven, T., Timmermans, M., Dorssers, L.C. & Henzen-Logmans, S.C. Expression of estrogen, progesterone and epidermal growth factor receptors in primary and metastatic breast cancer. Int. J. Cancer 63, 790–793 (1995).
14. Wei, Q. et al. EGFR, HER2, and HER3 expression in laryngeal primary tumors and corresponding metastases. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 15, 1193–1201 (2008).
15. Wei, Q. et al. EGFR, HER2 and HER3 expression in esophageal primary tumours and corresponding metastases. Int. J. Oncol. 31, 493–499 (2007).
16. Shen, L. et al. EGFR and HER2 expression in primary cervical cancers and corresponding lymph node metastases: implications for targeted radiotherapy. BMC Cancer 8, 232 (2008).
17. Carlsson, J., Shen, L., Xiang, J., Xu, J. & Wei, Q. Tendencies for higher co-expression of EGFR and HER2 and downregulation of HER3 in prostate cancer lymph node metastases compared with corresponding primary tumors. Oncology Lett. 5, 208–214 (2013).
18. Bue, P. et al. Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor in urinary bladder cancer metastases. Int. J. Cancer 76, 189–193 (1998).
19. Italiano, A. et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) status in primary colorectal tumors correlates with EGFR expression in related metastatic sites: biological and clinical implications. Ann. Oncol. 16, 1503–1507 (2005).
20. Real, F.X. et al. Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor in human cultured cells and tissues: relationship to cell lineage and stage of differentiation. Cancer Res. 46, 4726–4731 (1986).
21. Kern, K.A. Sentinel lymph node mapping in breast cancer using subareolar injection of blue dye. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 189, 539–545 (1999).
22. Brader, P. et al. Imaging of lymph node micrometastases using an oncolytic herpes virus and [F]FEAU PET. PLoS ONE 4, e4789 (2009).
23. Tafreshi, N.K. et al. Noninvasive detection of breast cancer lymph node metastasis using carbonic anhydrases IX and XII targeted imaging probes. Clin. Cancer Res. 18, 207–219 (2012).
24. Tafreshi, N.K. et al. A mammaglobin-A targeting agent for noninvasive detection of breast cancer metastasis in lymph nodes. Cancer Res. 71, 1050–1059 (2011).
25. Savariar, E.N. et al. Real-time in vivo molecular detection of primary tumors and metastases with ratiometric activatable cell-penetrating peptides. Cancer Res. 73, 855–864 (2013).
26. Weaver, D.L. Pathology evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer: protocol recommendations and rationale. Mod. Pathol. 23 (suppl. 2), S26–S32 (2010).
27. Sexton, K. et al. Pulsed-light imaging for fluorescence guided surgery under normal room lighting. Opt. Lett. 38, 3249–3252 (2013).
28. Porter, C.J. & Charman, S.A. Lymphatic transport of proteins after subcutaneous administration. J. Pharm. Sci. 89, 297–310 (2000).
29. Gerlinger, M. et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 883–892 (2012).
30. Hettiarachchi, K., Kim, H. & Faris, G.W. Optical manipulation and control of real-time PCR in cell encapsulating microdroplets by IR laser. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 13, 967–975 (2012).
31. Liebert, A. et al. Time-resolved multidistance near-infrared spectroscopy of the adult head: intracerebral and extracerebral absorption changes from moments of distribution of times of flight of photons. Appl. Opt. 43, 3037–3047 (2004).
32. Zhu, Q. et al. Benign versus malignant breast masses: optical differentiation with US-guided optical imaging reconstruction. Radiology 237, 57–66 (2005).
33. Flynn, B.P., Dsouza, A.V., Kanick, S.C., Davis, S.C. & Pogue, B.W. White light-informed optical properties improve ultrasound-guided fluorescence tomography of photoactive protoporphyrin IX. J. Biomed. Opt. 18, 046008 (2013).
34. Koral, K.F. et al. SPECT dual-energy-window Compton correction: scatter multiplier required for quantification. J. Nucl. Med. 31, 90–98 (1990).
35. Jenkins, D.E., Hornig, Y.S., Oei, Y., Dusich, J. & Purchio, T. Bioluminescent human breast cancer cell lines that permit rapid and sensitive in vivo detection of mammary tumors and multiple metastases in immune deficient mice. Breast Cancer Res. 7, R444–R454 (2005).
36. Contag, C.H., Jenkins, D., Contag, P.R. & Negrin, R.S. Use of reporter genes for optical measurements of neoplastic disease in vivo. Neoplasia 2, 41–52 (2000).
37. Reilly, R.M. et al. A comparison of EGF and MAb 528 labeled with 111In for imaging human breast cancer. J. Nucl. Med. 41, 903–911 (2000).
38. Peng, X. et al. Phthalocyanine dye as an extremely photostable and highly fluorescent near-infrared labeling agent. Proc. SPIE 6097, 19 (2006).
39. Wu, F. et al. Fluorescence imaging of the lymph node uptake of proteins in mice after subcutaneous injection: molecular weight dependence. Pharm. Res. 29, 1843–1853 (2012).
40. Alcoser, S.Y. et al. Real-time PCR-based assay to quantify the relative amount of human and mouse tissue present in tumor xenografts. BMC Biotechnol. 11, 124 (2011).
41. Becker, M. et al. Sensitive PCR method for the detection and real-time quantification of human cells in xenotransplantation systems. Br. J. Cancer 87, 1328–1335 (2002).
42. Hamzei, N. et al. Comparison of kinetic models for dual-tracer receptor concentration imaging in tumors. Austin J. Biomed. Eng. 1, 9 (2014).
43. Samkoe, K.S. et al. High vascular delivery of EGF, but low receptor binding rate is observed in AsPC-1 tumors as compared to normal pancreas. Mol. Imaging Biol. 14, 472–479 (2012).
44. Tichauer, K.M. et al. Tumor endothelial marker imaging in melanomas using dual-tracer fluorescence molecular imaging. Mol. Imaging Biol. 16, 372–382 (2014).
45. Tichauer, K.M. et al. Accounting for pharmacokinetic differences in dual-tracer receptor density imaging. Phys. Med. Biol. 59, 2341–2351 (2014).
46. Tichauer, K.M., Samkoe, K.S., Klubben, W.S., Hasan, T. & Pogue, B.W. Advantages of a dual-tracer model over reference tissue models for binding potential measurement in tumors. Phys. Med. Biol. 57, 6647–6659 (2012).
47. Tichauer, K.M. et al. Improved tumor contrast achieved by single time point dual-reporter fluorescence imaging. J. Biomed. Opt. 17, 066001 (2012).
48. Lammertsma, A.A. & Hume, S.P. Simplified reference tissue model for PET receptor studies. Neuroimage 4, 153–158 (1996).
49. Innis, R.B. et al. Consensus nomenclature for in vivo imaging of reversibly binding radioligands. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 27, 1533–1539 (2007).
50. Jacques, S.L. Optical properties of biological tissues: a review. Phys. Med. Biol. 58, R37–R61 (2013).
51. 11C]DASB positron emission tomography studies of the serotonin transporter in human brain. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 23, 1096–1112 (2003).
52. 11C]raclopride studies. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 16, 42–52 (1996).
53. Kety, S.S. The theory and applications of the exchange of inert gas at the lungs and tissues. Pharmacol. Rev. 3, 1–41 (1951).
54. Patel, D. et al. Monoclonal antibody cetuximab binds to and down-regulates constitutively activated epidermal growth factor receptor vIII on the cell surface. Anticancer Res. 27, 3355–3366 (2007).