Quantification of the binding potential of cell-surface receptors in fresh excised specimens via dual-probe modeling of SERS nanoparticles

Scientific Reports

Volumn 5, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Sinha, Lagnojita ^a,b   Wang, Yu ^c,d   Yang, Cynthia ^a   Khan, Altaz ^c,d   Brankov, Jovan G ^b   Liu, Jonathan T C ^c,d   Tichauer, Kenneth M ^a  

^a Illinois Institute of Technology   (United States)

^b ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c St Francis Hospital The Heart Center   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EGFR PROTEIN, HUMAN; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; MOLECULAR PROBE; NANOPARTICLE; PROTEIN BINDING;

ANIMAL; CANCER TRANSPLANTATION; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; GLIOMA; MALE; METABOLISM; MOLECULAR PROBE; NUDE MOUSE; PROCEDURES; RAMAN SPECTROMETRY; STAINING;

ANIMALS; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; GLIOMA; MALE; MICE, NUDE; MOLECULAR PROBES; NANOPARTICLES; NEOPLASM TRANSPLANTATION; PROTEIN BINDING; RECEPTOR, EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR; SPECTRUM ANALYSIS, RAMAN; STAINING AND LABELING; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE;

EID: 84923886458     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep08582     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Singletary, S. E. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am. J. Surg. 184, 383-393 (2002).
2. Adams, B. J. et al. The role of margin status and reexcision in local recurrence following breast conservation surgery. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 20, 2250-2255, doi:10.1245/s10434-012-2831-3 (2013).
3. Jones, H. A. et al. Impact of pathological characteristics on local relapse after breast-conserving therapy: a subgroup analysis of the EORTC boost versus no boost trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 27, 4939-4947, doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.21.5764 (2009).
4. Pleijhuis, R. G. et al. Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 16, 2717-2730 (2009).
5. Moran, M. S. et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 1507-1515, doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.53.3935 (2014).
6. DeSantis, C.,Ma, J., Bryan, L.& Jemal, A. Breast cancer statistics, 2013. CA-Cancer J. Clin. 64, 52-62, doi:10.3322/caac.21203 (2014).
7. Hou, N. & Huo, D. A trend analysis of breast cancer incidence rates in the United States from 2000 to 2009 shows a recent increase. Breast Cancer Res. Tr. 138, 633-641, doi:10.1007/s10549-013-2434-0 (2013).
8. Jacobs, L. Positive margins: the challenge continues for breast surgeons. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 15, 1271-1272, doi:10.1245/s10434-007-9766-0 (2008).
9. Jeevan, R. et al. Reoperation rates after breast conserving surgery for breast cancer among women in England: retrospective study of hospital episode statistics. Brit. Med. J. 345, e4505, doi:10.1136/bmj.e4505 (2012).
10. Waljee, J. F., Hu, E. S., Newman, L. A. & Alderman, A. K. Predictors of re-excision among women undergoing breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 15, 1297-1303, doi:10.1245/s10434-007-9777-x (2008).
11. Guidi, A. J., Connolly, J. L., Harris, J. R. & Schnitt, S. J. The relationship between shaved margin and inked margin status in breast excision specimens. Cancer 79, 1568-1573 (1997).
12. Abeytunge, S. et al. Confocal microscopy with strip mosaicing for rapid imaging over large areas of excised tissue. J. Biomed. Opt. 18, 61227, doi:10.1117/1.JBO.18.6.061227 (2013).
13. Abeytunge, S., Li, Y., Larson, B., Toledo-Crow, R. & Rajadhyaksha, M. Rapid confocal imaging of large areas of excised tissue with strip mosaicing. J. Biomed. Opt. 16, 050504, doi:10.1117/1.3582335 (2011).
14. Gareau, D. S. et al. Confocal mosaicing microscopy in skin excisions: a demonstration of rapid surgical pathology. J. Microsc. 233, 149-159, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2818.2008.03105.x (2009).
15. Sharma, V. et al. Auto-fluorescence lifetime and light reflectance spectroscopy for breast cancer diagnosis: potential tools for intraoperative margin detection. Biomed. Opt. Express 3, 1825-1840, doi:10.1364/BOE.3.001825 (2012).
16. Rubio, I. T. et al. Use of touch preps for intraoperative diagnosis of sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 5, 689-694 (1998).
17. Valdes, E. K., Boolbol, S. K., Cohen, J. M. & Feldman, S. M. Intra-operative touch preparation cytology; does it have a role in re-excision lumpectomy? Ann. Surgic. Oncol. 14, 1045-1050, doi:10.1245/s10434-006-9263-x (2007).
18. Jorns, J. M. et al. Intraoperative frozen section analysis of margins in breast conserving surgery significantly decreases reoperative rates: one-year experience at an ambulatory surgical center. Am. J. Clin. Path. 138, 657-669, doi:10.1309/AJCP4IEMXCJ1GDTS (2012).
19. Di Renzo, M. F. et al. Overexpression and amplification of the met/HGF receptor gene during the progression of colorectal cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 1, 147-154 (1995).
20. Rusch, V. et al. Overexpression of the epidermal growth factor receptor and its ligand transforming growth factor alpha is frequent in resectable non-small cell lung cancer but does not predict tumor progression. Clin. Cancer Res. 3, 515-522 (1997).
21. Bast, R. C., Jr. et al. 2000 update of recommendations for the use of tumormarkers in breast and colorectal cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 1865-1878 (2001).
22. Jain, R. K. Delivery of molecular and cellular medicine to solid tumors. Adv. Drug Deliver. Rev. 46, 149-168 (2001).
23. Liu, J. T. et al. Quantifying cell-surface biomarker expression in thick tissues with ratiometric three-dimensional microscopy. Biophys. J. 96, 2405-2414, doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2008.12.3908 (2009).
24. 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).
25. McLarty, K. et al. Associations between the uptake of (111)In-DTPAtrastuzumab, HER2 density and response to trastuzumab (Herceptin) in athymic mice bearing subcutaneous human tumour xenografts. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. I. 36, 81-93, doi:Doi 10.1007/S00259-008-0923-X (2009).
26. Pogue, B. W. et al. Imaging targeted-agent binding in vivo with two probes. J. Biomed. Opt. 15, 030513, doi:10.1117/1.3449109 (2010).
27. Pressman, D., Day, E. D. & Blau, M. The use of paired labeling in the determination of tumor-localizing antibodies. Cancer Res. 17, 845-850 (1957).
28. Wang, D. et al. Microscopic Delineation of Medulloblastoma Margins in a Transgenic Mouse Model Using a Topically Applied VEGFR-1 Probe. Transl. Oncol. 5, 408-414 (2012).
29. Wang, Y. et al. Comprehensive spectral endoscopy of topically applied SERS nanoparticles in the rat esophagus. Biomed. Opt. Express 5, 2883 (2014).
30. Davis, S. C., Gibbs, S. L., Gunn, J. R. & Pogue, B.W. Topical dual-stain difference imaging for rapid intra-operative tumor identification in fresh specimens. Opt. Lett. 38, 5184-5187, doi:10.1364/OL.38.005184 (2013).
31. Blasberg, R. G. et al. Regional localization of a glioma-associated antigen defined by monoclonal antibody 81C6 in vivo: kinetics and implications for diagnosis and therapy. Cancer Res. 47, 4432-4443 (1987).
32. Davis, S. C. et al. Dynamic dual-tracer MRI-guided fluorescence tomography to quantify receptor density in vivo. P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 9025-9030, doi:10.1073/pnas.1213490110 (2013).
33. Huang, S. C. et al. A double-injection technique for in vivo measurement of dopamine D2-receptor density in monkeys with 3-(2'-[18F]fluoroethyl)spiperone and dynamic positron emission tomography. J. Cerebr. Blood F. Met. 9, 850-858, doi:10.1038/jcbfm.1989.119 (1989).
34. Tichauer, K. M. et al. In vivo quantification of tumor receptor binding potential with dual-reporter molecular imaging. Mol. Imag. Biol. 14, 584-592, doi:10.1007/s11307-011-0534-y (2012).
35. Innis, R. B. et al. Consensus nomenclature for in vivo imaging of reversibly binding radioligands. J. Cerebr. Blood F. Met. 27, 1533-1539, doi:10.1038/sj.jcbfm.9600493 (2007).
36. Wang, Y. W. et al. Rapid ratiometric biomarker detection with topically applied SERS nanoparticles. Technology 2, 118-132, doi:10.1142/S2339547814500125 (2014).
37. Hamzei, N. et al. Comparison of kinetic models for dual-tracer receptor concentration imaging in tumors. Austin J. Biomed. Eng. 1, 9 (2014).
38. Tichauer, K. M. et al. Improved tumor contrast achieved by single time point dualreporter fluorescence imaging. J. Biomed. Opt. 17, 066001, doi:10.1117/1.JBO.17.6.066001 (2012).
39. Zavaleta, C. L. et al. Multiplexed imaging of surface enhanced Raman scattering nanotags in livingmice using noninvasive Raman spectroscopy. P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 13511-13516, doi:10.1073/pnas.0813327106 (2009).
40. Leigh, S. Y., Som, M. & Liu, J. T. Method for assessing the reliability of molecular diagnostics based on multiplexed SERS-coded nanoparticles. PloS One 8, e62084, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062084 (2013).
41. Lutz, B. R. et al. Spectral analysis of multiplex Raman probe signatures. ACS Nano 2, 2306-2314, doi:10.1021/nn800243g (2008).
42. Van de Sompel, D., Garai, E., Zavaleta, C. & Gambhir, S. S. A hybrid least squares and principal component analysis algorithm for Raman spectroscopy. PloS One 7, e38850, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038850 (2012).
43. Kanick, S. C., Tichauer, K. M., Gunn, J. R., Samkoe, K. S. & Pogue, B. W. Pixelbased absorption-correction for dual-tracer fluorescence imaging of receptor binding. Biomed. Opt. Express 5, 3280-3291 (2014).
44. Herbst, R. S. Review of epidermal growth factor receptor biology. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 59, 21-26, doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.11.041 (2004).
45. Samkoe, K. S. et al. Quantitative in vivo immunohistochemistry of epidermal growth factor receptor using a receptor concentration imaging approach. Cancer Res. Published Online First, doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-0141 (2014).
46. Thurber, G. M., Schmidt, M. M. & Wittrup, K. D. Factors determining antibody distribution in tumors. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 29, 57-61, doi:10.1016/j.tips.2007.11.004 (2008).
47. Jacques, S. L. Optical properties of biological tissues: a review. Phys. Med. Biol. 58, R37-61, doi:10.1088/0031-9155/58/11/R37 (2013).
48. Longo, D. L. Tumor heterogeneity and personalized medicine. New Engl. J. Med. 366, 956-957, doi:10.1056/NEJMe1200656 (2012).
49. Thurber, G. M. & Dane Wittrup, K. Amechanistic compartmentalmodel for total antibody uptake in tumors. J. Theor. Biol. 314, 57-68, doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.08.034 (2012).
50. Wilks, M. Q., Knowles, S. M.,Wu, A. M. & Huang, S. C. Improved Modeling of In Vivo Kinetics of Slowly Diffusing Radiotracers for Tumor Imaging. J. Nucl. Med., doi:10.2967/jnumed.114.140038 (2014).
51. Ivanov, A. A. & Zhdanov, A. I. Kaczmarz algorithm for Tikhonov regularization problem. Appl. Math. 13, 270-276 (2013).
52. Liu, J. T. et al. Point-of-care pathology with miniature microscopes. Anal. Cell. Path. 34, 81-98, doi:10.3233/ACP-2011-011 (2011).