Image-guided drug delivery with single-photon emission computed tomography: A review of literature

Current Drug Targets

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 592-609

  Chakravarty, Rubel ^a,b   Hong, Hao ^a   Cai, Weibo ^a,c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b BHABHA ATOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE   (India)

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

^d UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer; Chemotherapy; Image guided drug delivery; Molecular imaging; Single photon emission computed tomography; Theranostics

Indexed keywords

CARBON NANOTUBE; COPPER 67; DENDRIMER; DEXAMETHASONE; DOXORUBICIN; DRUG CARRIER; FOLATE RECEPTOR; GALLIUM 67; INDIUM 111; IODINE 123; IODINE 125; LIPOSOME; METRONIDAZOLE; NANOPARTICLE; PACLITAXEL; RADIOISOTOPE; TECHNETIUM 99M; THALLIUM 201; VASCULOTROPIN; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; DRUG EFFICACY; HELICOBACTER INFECTION; HUMAN; ISOTOPE LABELING; LIVER CANCER; LUNG CANCER; MICELLE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NONHUMAN; OVARY CANCER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REVIEW; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; STOMACH CANCER; TUMOR XENOGRAFT; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; CHEMISTRY; NEOPLASMS; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PROCEDURES; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; DRUG CARRIERS; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; HUMANS; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NEOPLASMS; PRECISION MEDICINE; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED, SINGLE-PHOTON;

EID: 84938592194     PISSN: 13894501     EISSN: 18735592     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/1389450115666140902125657     Document Type: Review

References (152)

1. Herschman HR. Molecular imaging: looking at problems, seeing solutions. Science 2003; 302(5645): 605-8.
2. Hoffman JM, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging: the vision and opportunity for radiology in the future. Radiology 2007; 244(1): 39-47.
3. Weissleder R, Pittet MJ. Imaging in the era of molecular oncology. Nature 2008; 452(7187): 580-9.
4. Kircher MF, Hricak H, Larson SM. Molecular imaging for personalized cancer care. Mol Oncol 2012; 6(2): 182-95.
5. Weber WA, Grosu AL, Czernin J. Technology Insight: advances in molecular imaging and an appraisal of PET/CT scanning. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2008; 5(3): 160-70.
6. Chen Z-Y, Wang Y-X, Lin Y, et al. Advance of Molecular Imaging Technology and Targeted Imaging Agent in Imaging and Therapy. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014: 12.
7. Hatefi A, Minko T. Advances in image-guided drug delivery. Drug Deliv Transl Res. 2012; 2(1): 1-2.
8. MacKay JA, Li Z. Theranostic agents that co-deliver therapeutic and imaging agents? Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2010; 62(11): 1003-4.
9. Chow EK, Ho D. Cancer nanomedicine: from drug delivery to imaging. Sci Transl Med 2013; 5(216): 216rv4.
10. Terreno E, Uggeri F, Aime S. Image guided therapy: the advent of theranostic agents. J Control Release 2012; 161(2): 328-37.
11. Arias JL. Advanced methodologies to formulate nanotheragnostic agents for combined drug delivery and imaging. Expert Opin Drug Del 2011; 8(12): 1589-608.
12. Iyer AK, He J, Amiji MM. Image-guided nanosystems for targeted delivery in cancer therapy. Curr Med Chem 2012; 19(19): 3230-40.
13. Zhang Y, Chan HF, Leong KW. Advanced materials and processing for drug delivery: the past and the future. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2013; 65(1): 104-20.
14. Fass L. Imaging and cancer: a review. Mol Oncol 2008; 2(2): 115-52.
15. Ametamey SM, Honer M, Schubiger PA. Molecular imaging with PET. Chem Rev 2008; 108(5): 1501-16.
16. Jennings LE, Long NJ. 'Two is better than one'--probes for dualmodality molecular imaging. Chem Commun (Camb) 2009(24): 3511-24.
17. Kiessling F, Fokong S, Bzyl J, Lederle W, Palmowski M, Lammers T. Recent advances in molecular, multimodal and theranostic ultrasound imaging. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2014; 72C: 15-27.
18. James ML, Gambhir SS. A molecular imaging primer: modalities, imaging agents, and applications. Physiol Rev 2012; 92(2): 897-965.
19. Chakravarty R, Hong H, Cai W. Positron Emission Tomography Image-Guided Drug Delivery: Current Status and Future Perspectives. Mol Pharm 2014 (DOI: 10.1021/mp500173s).
20. Mariani G, Bruselli L, Kuwert T, et al. A review on the clinical uses of SPECT/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010; 37(10): 1959-85.
21. Bao S, Cao W, Li J. Radioisotope labeled molecular imaging in spect. Molecular imaging. Advanced topics in science and technology in China: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2013; p. 313-32.
22. Eckelman WC. Unparalleled contribution of technetium-99m to medicine over 5 decades. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009; 2(3): 364-8.
23. Knapp FF, Jr., Mirzadeh S. The continuing important role of radionuclide generator systems for nuclear medicine. Eur J Nucl Med 1994; 21(10): 1151-65.
24. Cutler CS, Hennkens HM, Sisay N, Huclier-Markai S, Jurisson SS. Radiometals for combined imaging and therapy. Chem Rev 2013; 113(2): 858-83.
25. Chakravarty R, Dash A. Development of Radionuclide Generators for Biomedical Applications: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing; 2013.
26. Jansen FP, Vanderheyden JL. The future of SPECT in a time of PET. Nucl Med Biol 2007; 34(7): 733-5.
27. Gholamrezanejhad A, Mirpour S, Mariani G. Future of nuclear medicine: SPECT versus PET. J Nucl Med 2009; 50(7): 16N-8N.
28. Rahmim A, Zaidi H. PET versus SPECT: strengths, limitations and challenges. Nucl Med Commun 2008; 29(3): 193-207.
29. Alavi A, Basu S. Planar and SPECT imaging in the era of PET and PET-CT: can it survive the test of time? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35(8): 1554-9.
30. Khalil MM, Tremoleda JL, Bayomy TB, Gsell W. Molecular SPECT Imaging: An Overview. Int J Mol Imaging 2011; 2011: 796025.
31. Mariani G, Bruselli L, Duatti A. Is PET always an advantage versus planar and SPECT imaging? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35(8): 1560-5.
32. Madsen MT. Recent advances in SPECT imaging. J Nucl Med 2007; 48(4): 661-73.
33. Seo Y, Mari C, Hasegawa BH. Technological development and advances in single-photon emission computed tomography/ computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med 2008; 38(3): 177-98.
34. Lammers T, Kiessling F, Hennink WE, Storm G. Nanotheranostics and image-guided drug delivery: current concepts and future directions. Mol Pharm 2010; 7(6): 1899-912.
35. Janib SM, Moses AS, MacKay JA. Imaging and drug delivery using theranostic nanoparticles. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2010; 62(11): 1052-63.
36. Backer MV, Aloise R, Przekop K, Stoletov K, Backer JM. Molecular vehicles for targeted drug delivery. Bioconjug Chem 2002; 13(3): 462-7.
37. Wilbur DS, Pathare PM, Hamlin DK, et al. Development of new biotin/streptavidin reagents for pretargeting. Biomol Eng 1999; 16(1-4): 113-8.
38. Bertrand N, Wu J, Xu X, Kamaly N, Farokhzad OC. Cancer nanotechnology: the impact of passive and active targeting in the era of modern cancer biology. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2014; 66: 2-25.
39. Lu ZR. Molecular imaging of HPMA copolymers: visualizing drug delivery in cell, mouse and man. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2010; 62(2): 246-57.
40. Liechty WB, Kryscio DR, Slaughter BV, Peppas NA. Polymers for drug delivery systems. Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng 2010; 1: 149-73.
41. Kumari A, Yadav SK, Yadav SC. Biodegradable polymeric nanoparticles based drug delivery systems. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 2010; 75(1): 1-18.
42. Wang D, Sima M, Mosley RL, et al. Pharmacokinetic and biodistribution studies of a bone-targeting drug delivery system based on N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide copolymers. Mol Pharm 2006; 3(6): 717-25.
43. Buckway B, Wang Y, Ray A, Ghandehari H. Overcoming the stromal barrier for targeted delivery of HPMA copolymers to pancreatic tumors. Int J Pharm 2013; 456(1): 202-11.
44. Provenzano PP, Cuevas C, Chang AE, Goel VK, Von Hoff DD, Hingorani SR. Enzymatic targeting of the stroma ablates physical barriers to treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Cell 2012; 21(3): 418-29.
45. Zhang R, Luo K, Yang J, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of a backbone biodegradable multiblock HPMA copolymer nanocarrier for the systemic delivery of paclitaxel. J Control Release 2013; 166(1): 66-74.
46. Shi W, Ogbomo SM, Wagh NK, et al. The influence of linker length on the properties of cathepsin S cleavable 177Lu-labeled HPMA cop1olymers for pancreatic cancer imaging. Biomaterials 2014; 35(22): 5760-70.
47. Petanceska S, Canoll P, Devi LA. Expression of rat cathepsin S in phagocytic cells. J Biol Chem 1996; 271(8): 4403-9.
48. Patil V, Gada K, Panwar R, et al. Imaging small human prostate cancer xenografts after pretargeting with bispecific bombesinantibody complexes and targeting with high specific radioactivity labeled polymer-drug conjugates. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39(5): 824-39.
49. Khaw BA, Gada KS, Patil V, et al. Bispecific antibody complex pre-targeting and targeted delivery of polymer drug conjugates for imaging and therapy in dual human mammary cancer xenografts : Targeted polymer drug conjugates for cancer diagnosis and therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41(8): 1603-16.
50. Nanjwade BK, Bechra HM, Derkar GK, Manvi FV, Nanjwade VK. Dendrimers: emerging polymers for drug-delivery systems. Eur J Pharm Sci 2009; 38(3): 185-96.
51. Medina SH, El-Sayed ME. Dendrimers as carriers for delivery of chemotherapeutic agents. Chem Rev 2009; 109(7): 3141-57.
52. Parrott MC, Benhabbour SR, Saab C, et al. Synthesis, radiolabeling, and bio-imaging of high-generation polyester dendrimers. J Am Chem Soc 2009; 131(8): 2906-16.
53. Zhang Y, Sun Y, Xu X, et al. Radiosynthesis and micro-SPECT imaging of 99mTc-dendrimer poly(amido)-amine folic acid conjugate. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2010; 20(3): 927-31.
54. Zhang Y, Sun Y, Xu X, et al. Synthesis, biodistribution, and microsingle photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging study of technetium-99m labeled PEGylated dendrimer poly(amidoamine) (PAMAM)-folic acid conjugates. J Med Chem 2010; 53(8): 3262-72.
55. Xu X, Zhang Y, Wang X, et al. Radiosynthesis, biodistribution and micro-SPECT imaging study of dendrimer-avidin conjugate. Bioorg Med Chem 2011; 19(5): 1643-8.
56. Kesharwani P, Jain K, Jain NK. Dendrimer as nanocarrier for drug delivery. Prog Polym Sci 2014; 39(2): 268-307.
57. Kedar U, Phutane P, Shidhaye S, Kadam V. Advances in polymeric micelles for drug delivery and tumor targeting. Nanomedicine 2010; 6(6): 714-29.
58. Kim S, Shi Y, Kim JY, Park K, Cheng JX. Overcoming the barriers in micellar drug delivery: loading efficiency, in vivo stability, and micelle-cell interaction. Expert Opin Drug Del 2010; 7(1): 49-62.
59. Hoang B, Lee H, Reilly RM, Allen C. Noninvasive monitoring of the fate of 111In-labeled block copolymer micelles by high resolution and high sensitivity microSPECT/CT imaging. Mol Pharm 2009; 6(2): 581-92.
60. Peng CL, Shih YH, Lee PC, Hsieh TM, Luo TY, Shieh MJ. Multimodal image-guided photothermal therapy mediated by 188Relabeled micelles containing a cyanine-type photosensitizer. ACS Nano 2011; 5(7): 5594-607.
61. Cheng CC, Huang CF, Ho AS, et al. Novel targeted nuclear imaging agent for gastric cancer diagnosis: glucose-regulated protein 78 binding peptide-guided 111In-labeled polymeric micelles. Int J Nanomedicine 2013; 8: 1385-91.
62. Hong Y, Zhu H, Hu J, et al. Synthesis and radiolabeling of 111Incore- cross linked polymeric micelle-octreotide for near-infrared fluoroscopy and single photon emission computed tomography imaging. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2014; 24(12): 2781-5.
63. Maldonado CR, Gomez-Blanco N, Jauregui-Osoro M, Brunton VG, Yate L, Mareque-Rivas JC. QD-filled micelles which combine SPECT and optical imaging with light-induced activation of a platinum(IV) prodrug for anticancer applications. Chem Commun (Camb) 2013; 49(38): 3985-7.
64. Allen TM, Cullis PR. Liposomal drug delivery systems: from concept to clinical applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2013; 65(1): 36-48.
65. Phillips WT, Goins BA, Bao A. Radioactive liposomes. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2009; 1(1): 69-83.
66. Chen LC, Chang CH, Yu CY, et al. Biodistribution, pharmacokinetics and imaging of 188Re-BMEDA-labeled pegylated liposomes after intraperitoneal injection in a C26 colon carcinoma ascites mouse model. Nucl Med Biol 2007; 34(4): 415-23.
67. Rangger C, Helbok A, von Guggenberg E, et al. Influence of PEGylation and RGD loading on the targeting properties of radiolabeled liposomal nanoparticles. Int J Nanomedicine 2012; 7: 5889-900.
68. Chang YJ, Chang CH, Yu CY, et al. Therapeutic efficacy and microSPECT/CT imaging of 188Re-DXR-liposome in a C26 murine colon carcinoma solid tumor model. Nucl Med Biol 2010; 37(1): 95-104.
69. Zavaleta CL, Phillips WT, Soundararajan A, Goins BA. Use of avidin/biotin-liposome system for enhanced peritoneal drug delivery in an ovarian cancer model. Int J Pharm 2007; 337(1-2): 316-28.
70. Head HW, Dodd GD, Bao A, et al. Combination radiofrequency ablation and intravenous radiolabeled liposomal Doxorubicin: imaging and quantification of increased drug delivery to tumors. Radiology 2010; 255(2): 405-14.
71. de Smet M, Langereis S, van den Bosch S, et al. SPECT/CT imaging of temperature-sensitive liposomes for MR-image guided drug delivery with high intensity focused ultrasound. J Control Release 2013; 169(1-2): 82-90.
72. Yatvin MB, Weinstein JN, Dennis WH, Blumenthal R. Design of liposomes for enhanced local release of drugs by hyperthermia. Science 1978; 202(4374): 1290-3.
73. de Smet M, Hijnen NM, Langereis S, et al. Magnetic resonance guided high-intensity focused ultrasound mediated hyperthermia improves the intratumoral distribution of temperature-sensitive liposomal doxorubicin. Invest Radiol 2013; 48(6): 395-405.
74. Helbok A, Decristoforo C, Dobrozemsky G, et al. Radiolabeling of lipid-based nanoparticles for diagnostics and therapeutic applications: a comparison using different radiometals. J Liposome Res 2010; 20(3): 219-27.
75. Rangger C, Helbok A, Sosabowski J, et al. Tumor targeting and imaging with dual-peptide conjugated multifunctional liposomal nanoparticles. Int J Nanomedicine 2013; 8: 4659-71.
76. Helbok A, Rangger C, von Guggenberg E, et al. Targeting properties of peptide-modified radiolabeled liposomal nanoparticles. Nanomedicine 2012; 8(1): 112-8.
77. Huang FY, Chen WJ, Lee WY, Lo ST, Lee TW, Lo JM. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of lactoferrin-conjugated liposomes as a novel carrier to improve the brain delivery. Int J Mol Sci 2013; 14(2): 2862-74.
78. Li S, Goins B, Zhang L, Bao A. Novel multifunctional theranostic liposome drug delivery system: construction, characterization, and multimodality MR, near-infrared fluorescent, and nuclear imaging. Bioconjug Chem 2012; 23(6): 1322-32.
79. Silindir M, Erdogan S, Ozer AY, et al. Nanosized multifunctional liposomes for tumor diagnosis and molecular imaging by SPECT/CT. J Liposome Res 2013; 23(1): 20-7.
80. Mitchell N, Kalber TL, Cooper MS, et al. Incorporation of paramagnetic, fluorescent and PET/SPECT contrast agents into liposomes for multimodal imaging. Biomaterials 2013; 34(4): 1179-92.
81. Kim JK, Yuan H, Nie J, et al. High payload dual therapeuticimaging nanocarriers for triggered tumor delivery. Small. 2012; 8(18): 2895-903.
82. Siepmann J, Siepmann F. Microparticles Used as Drug Delivery Systems. In: Richtering W, editor. Smart Colloidal Materials. Progress in Colloid and Polymer Science. 133: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2006; 15-21.
83. Kohane DS. Microparticles and nanoparticles for drug delivery. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2007; 96(2): 203-9.
84. Varde NK, Pack DW. Microspheres for controlled release drug delivery. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2004; 4(1): 35-51.
85. Vente MA, de Wit TC, van den Bosch MA, et al. Holmium-166 poly(L-lactic acid) microsphere radioembolisation of the liver: technical aspects studied in a large animal model. Eur Radiol 2010; 20(4): 862-9.
86. Hao S, Wang Y, Wang B, et al. A novel gastroretentive porous microparticle for anti-Helicobacter pylori therapy: preparation, in vitro and in vivo evaluation. Int J Pharm 2014; 463(1): 10-21.
87. Graham DY, Fischbach L. Helicobacter pylori treatment in the era of increasing antibiotic resistance. Gut 2010; 59(8): 1143-53.
88. Kim Y, Seol DR, Mohapatra S, et al. Locally targeted delivery of a micron-size radiation therapy source using temperature-sensitive hydrogel. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 88(5): 1142-7.
89. Biddiscombe MF, Usmani OS. The importance of imaging and physiology measurements in assessing the delivery of peripherally targeted aerosolized drugs. Ther Deliv 2012; 3(11): 1329-45.
90. Yang MY, Chan JG, Chan HK. Pulmonary drug delivery by powder aerosols. J Control Release 2014.
91. Leclerc L, Pourchez J, Prevot N, et al. Assessing sinus aerosol deposition: benefits of SPECT-CT imaging. Int J Pharm 2014; 462(1-2): 135-41.
92. Ding H, Wu F, Nair MP. Image-guided drug delivery to the brain using nanotechnology. Drug Discov Today 2013; 18(21-22): 1074-80.
93. Lammers T, Rizzo LY, Storm G, Kiessling F. Personalized nanomedicine. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18(18): 4889-94.
94. Minchin RF, Martin DJ. Nanoparticles for molecular imaging--an overview. Endocrinology 2010; 151(2): 474-81.
95. Lanza GM, Moonen C, Baker JR, Jr., Chang E, Cheng Z, Grodzinski P, et al. Assessing the barriers to image-guided drug delivery. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2014; 6(1): 1-14.
96. Liang R, Wei M, Evans DG, Duan X. Inorganic nanomaterials for bioimaging, targeted drug delivery and therapeutics. Chem Commun (Camb). 2014.
97. Tonga GY, Moyano DF, Kim CS, Rotello VM. Inorganic Nanoparticles for Therapeutic Delivery: Trials, Tribulations and Promise. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci 2014; 19(2): 49-55.
98. Kogan MJ, Olmedo I, Hosta L, Guerrero AR, Cruz LJ, Albericio F. Peptides and metallic nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Nanomedicine (Lond) 2007; 2(3): 287-306.
99. Kwon S, Singh RK, Perez RA, Abou Neel EA, Kim HW, Chrzanowski W. Silica-based mesoporous nanoparticles for controlled drug delivery. J Tissue Eng 2013; 4: 2041731413503357.
100. Turcheniuk K, Tarasevych AV, Kukhar VP, Boukherroub R, Szunerits S. Recent advances in surface chemistry strategies for the fabrication of functional iron oxide based magnetic nanoparticles. Nanoscale 2013; 5(22): 10729-52.
101. Morales-Avila E, Ferro-Flores G, Ocampo-Garcia BE, et al. Multimeric system of 99mTc-labeled gold nanoparticles conjugated to c[RGDfK(C)] for molecular imaging of tumor αvβ3 expression. Bioconjug Chem 2011; 22(5): 913-22.
102. Mendoza-Sanchez AN, Ferro-Flores G, Ocampo-Garcia BE, et al. Lys3-bombesin conjugated to 99mTc-labelled gold nanoparticles for gastrin releasing peptide-receptor imaging. J Biomed Nanotechnol 2010; 6(4): 375-84.
103. Ocampo-Garcia B, Ferro-Flores G, Morales-Avila E, Ramirez Fde M. Kit for preparation of multimeric receptor-specific 99mTcradiopharmaceuticals based on gold nanoparticles. Nucl Med Commun 2011; 32(11): 1095-104.
104. Agarwal A, Shao X, Rajian JR, et al. Dual-mode imaging with radiolabeled gold nanorods. J Biomed Opt 2011; 16(5): 051307.
105. You J, Zhang R, Xiong C, et al. Effective photothermal chemotherapy using doxorubicin-loaded gold nanospheres that target EphB4 receptors in tumors. Cancer Res 2012; 72(18): 4777-86.
106. Kao HW, Lin YY, Chen CC, et al. Evaluation of EGFR-targeted radioimmuno-gold-nanoparticles as a theranostic agent in a tumor animal model. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2013; 23(11): 3180-5.
107. Melancon MP, Zhou M, Zhang R, et al. Selective uptake and imaging of aptamer- and antibody-conjugated hollow nanospheres targeted to epidermal growth factor receptors overexpressed in head and neck cancer. ACS Nano 2014; 8(5): 4530-8.
108. Majdalawieh A, Kanan MC, El-Kadri O, Kanan SM. Recent advances in gold and silver nanoparticles: synthesis and applications. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2014; 14(7): 4757-80.
109. Chrastina A, Schnitzer JE. Iodine-125 radiolabeling of silver nanoparticles for SPECT imaging. Int J Nanomedicine 2010; 5: 653-9.
110. Di Pasqua AJ, Huckle JE, Kim JK, et al. Preparation of neutronactivatable holmium nanoparticles for the treatment of ovarian cancer metastases. Small 2012;8(7): 997-1000.
111. Di Pasqua AJ, Yuan H, Chung Y, et al. Neutron-activatable holmium- containing mesoporous silica nanoparticles as a potential radionuclide therapeutic agent for ovarian cancer. J Nucl Med 2013; 54(1): 111-6.
112. Thomas R, Park IK, Jeong YY. Magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for multimodal imaging and therapy of cancer. Int J Mol Sci 2013; 14(8): 15910-30.
113. Chakravarty R, Valdovinos HF, Chen F, et al. Intrinsically Germanium- 69-Labeled Iron Oxide Nanoparticles: Synthesis and Dual- Modality PET/MR Imaging. Adv Mater 2014; 26(30): 5119-23.
114. Madru R, Kjellman P, Olsson F, et al. 99mTc-labeled superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for multimodality SPECT/MRI of sentinel lymph nodes. J Nucl Med 2012; 53(3): 459-63.
115. Sandiford L, Phinikaridou A, Protti A, et al. Bisphosphonateanchored PEGylation and radiolabeling of superparamagnetic iron oxide: long-circulating nanoparticles for multimodal (T1 MRISPECT) imaging. ACS Nano 2013; 7(1): 500-12.
116. Lee CM, Cheong SJ, Kim EM, et al. Nonpolymeric surface-coated iron oxide nanoparticles for molecular imaging: biodegradation, biocompatibility, and multiplatform. J Nucl Med 2013; 54(11): 1974-80.
117. Park SI, Kwon BJ, Park JH, Jung H, Yu KH. Synthesis and characterization of 3-[131I]iodo-L-tyrosine grafted Fe3O4@SiO2 nanocomposite for single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2011; 11(2): 1818-21.
118. Psimadas D, Baldi G, Ravagli C, et al. Preliminary evaluation of a 99mTc labeled hybrid nanoparticle bearing a cobalt ferrite core: biodistribution. J Biomed Nanotechnol 2012; 8(4): 575-85.
119. Tseng YC, Xu Z, Guley K, Yuan H, Huang L. Lipid-calcium phosphate nanoparticles for delivery to the lymphatic system and SPECT/CT imaging of lymph node metastases. Biomaterials 2014; 35(16): 4688-98.
120. Kennel SJ, Woodward JD, Rondinone AJ, Wall J, Huang Y, Mirzadeh S. The fate of MAb-targeted Cd125mTe/ZnS nanoparticles . Nucl Med Biol 2008; 35(4): 501-14.
121. Zhang W, Zhang Z, Zhang Y. The application of carbon nanotubes in target drug delivery systems for cancer therapies. Nanoscale Res Lett 2011; 6(1): 1-22.
122. Rastogi V, Yadav P, Bhattacharya SS, et al. Carbon nanotubes: an emerging drug carrier for targeting cancer cells. J Drug Deliv 2014; 2014: 670815.
123. Wu W, Li R, Bian X, et al. Covalently combining carbon nanotubes with anticancer agent: preparation and antitumor activity. ACS Nano 2009; 3(9): 2740-50.
124. Hong SY, Tobias G, Al-Jamal KT, et al. Filled and glycosylated carbon nanotubes for radioemitter localization and imaging. Nat Mater 2010; 9(6): 485-90.
125. Liu Z, Jiao Y, Wang Y, Zhou C, Zhang Z. Polysaccharides-based nanoparticles as drug delivery systems. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2008; 60(15): 1650-62.
126. Varshosaz J. Dextran conjugates in drug delivery. Expert Opin Drug Del. 2012; 9(5): 509-23.
127. Agnihotri SA, Mallikarjuna NN, Aminabhavi TM. Recent advances on chitosan-based micro- and nanoparticles in drug delivery. J Control Release. 2004; 100(1): 5-28.
128. Chen MC, Wong HS, Lin KJ, et al. The characteristics, biodistribution and bioavailability of a chitosan-based nanoparticulate system for the oral delivery of heparin. Biomaterials 2009; 30(34): 6629-37.
129. Lee Y, Nam JH, Shin HC, Byun Y. Conjugation of low-molecularweight heparin and deoxycholic acid for the development of a new oral anticoagulant agent. Circulation 2001; 104(25): 3116-20.
130. Welt FG, Woods TC, Edelman ER. Oral heparin prevents neointimal hyperplasia after arterial injury: inhibitory potential depends on type of vascular injury. Circulation 2001; 104(25): 3121-4.
131. Tian Q, Zhang CN, Wang XH, et al. Glycyrrhetinic acid-modified chitosan/poly(ethylene glycol) nanoparticles for liver-targeted delivery. Biomaterials 2010; 31(17): 4748-56.
132. Polyak A, Hajdu I, Bodnar M, et al. 99mTc-labelled nanosystem as tumour imaging agent for SPECT and SPECT/CT modalities. Int J Pharm 2013; 449(1-2): 10-7.
133. Chuang EY, Lin KJ, Su FY, et al. Calcium depletion-mediated protease inhibition and apical-junctional-complex disassembly via an EGTA-conjugated carrier for oral insulin delivery. J Control Release 2013; 169(3): 296-305.
134. Alvarez-Lorenzo C, Blanco-Fernandez B, Puga AM, Concheiro A. Crosslinked ionic polysaccharides for stimuli-sensitive drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2013; 65(9): 1148-71.
135. Xie J, Wang H, Wang Y, et al. Induction of angiogenesis by controlled delivery of vascular endothelial growth factor using nanoparticles. Cardiovasc Ther 2013; 31(3): e12-8.
136. Jain JP, Yenet Ayen W, Domb AJ, Kumar N. Biodegradable Polymers in Drug Delivery. Biodegradable Polymers in Clinical Use and Clinical Development: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2011. p. 1-58.
137. Lu PL, Chen YC, Ou TW, et al. Multifunctional hollow nanoparticles based on graft-diblock copolymers for doxorubicin delivery. Biomaterials. 2011; 32(8): 2213-21.
138. Chakravarty R, Dash A, Venkatesh M. A novel electrochemical technique for the production of clinical grade 99mTc using (n, γ)99Mo. Nucl Med Biol 2010; 37(1): 21-8.
139. Chakravarty R, Ram R, Dash A, Pillai MR. Preparation of clinicalscale 99Mo/99mTc column generator using neutron activated low specific activity 99Mo and nanocrystalline gamma-Al2O3 as column matrix. Nucl Med Biol 2012; 39(7): 916-22.
140. Chakravarty R, Shukla R, Gandhi S, et al. Polymer embedded nanocrystalline titania sorbent for 99Mo-99mTc generator. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2008; 8(9): 4447-52.
141. Pillai MR, Dash A, Knapp FF, Jr. Sustained availability of 99mTc: possible paths forward. J Nucl Med 2013; 54(2): 313-23.
142. D'Auria JM, Keller R, Ladouceur K, Lapi SE, Ruth TJ, Schmor P. An alternate approach to the production of radioisotopes for nuclear medicine applications. Rev Sci Instrum 2013; 84(3): 034705.
143. International Atomic Energy A. IAEA addresses global radioisotope shortage. J Nucl Med 2009; 50(1): 15N.
144. Small GR, Ruddy TD, Simion O, et al. Lessons from the Tc-99m shortage: implications of substituting Tl-201 for Tc-99m singlephoton emission computed tomography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013; 6(5): 683-91.
145. Felice B, Prabhakaran MP, Rodriguez AP, Ramakrishna S. Drug delivery vehicles on a nano-engineering perspective. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 2014; 41C: 178-95.
146. Cai W, Chen X. Nanoplatforms for targeted molecular imaging in living subjects. Small 2007; 3(11): 1840-54.
147. Fernandez-Fernandez A, Manchanda R, McGoron AJ. Theranostic applications of nanomaterials in cancer: drug delivery, imageguided therapy, and multifunctional platforms. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2011; 165(7-8): 1628-51.
148. Shi S, Chen F, Cai W. Biomedical applications of functionalized hollow mesoporous silica nanoparticles: focusing on molecular imaging. Nanomedicine (Lond) 2013; 8(12): 2027-39.
149. Hong H, Zhang Y, Sun J, Cai W. Molecular imaging and therapy of cancer with radiolabeled nanoparticles. Nano Today 2009; 4(5): 399-413.
150. Cai W, Chen X. Multimodality molecular imaging of tumor angiogenesis. J Nucl Med 2008; 49 Suppl 2: 113S-28S.
151. US FDA Investigational New Drug approval for first-in-human trial of novel cancer-targeting nanoparticle. News & Analysis. Ther Deliv 2011; 2(3): 287.
152. Jin SE, Jin HE, Hong SS. Targeted delivery system of nanobiomaterials in anticancer therapy: from cells to clinics. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014: 814208.