Functional nanoparticles for magnetic resonance imaging

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology

Volumn 8, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 814-841

  Mao, Xinpei ^a   Xu, Jiadi ^b,c   Cui, Honggang ^a,d,e  

^a Johns Hopkins University   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c KENNEDY KRIEGER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MAGNETISM; MEDICAL APPLICATIONS; NANOMAGNETICS; NANOPARTICLES; NANOSTRUCTURES; SIGNAL SYSTEMS;

BIOMEDICAL APPLICATIONS; CHEMICAL EXCHANGE SATURATION TRANSFER; EXCHANGEABLE PROTONS; FUNCTIONAL NANOPARTICLES; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING CONTRAST AGENTS; MRI CONTRAST AGENTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON OXIDE NANOPARTICLES;

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

APOFERRITIN; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DENDRIMER; ENZYME; GADOLINIUM; GADOLINIUM CHELATE; HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; LANTHANIDE; LIPOSOME; METAL OXIDE; NANOPARTICLE; QUANTUM DOT; SILICON DIOXIDE; SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON OXIDE NANOPARTICLE; MAGNETITE NANOPARTICLE;

MICELLE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STIMULUS; PROCEDURES; THERANOSTIC NANOMEDICINE;

CONTRAST MEDIA; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETITE NANOPARTICLES; THERANOSTIC NANOMEDICINE;

EID: 84963682605     PISSN: 19395116     EISSN: 19390041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wnan.1400     Document Type: Review

References (111)

1. Brown MA, Semelka RC. MRI: Basic Principles and Applications: Wiley, 2011.
2. Tang H, Wu EX, Ma QY, Gallagher D, Perera GM, Zhuang T. MRI brain image segmentation by multi-resolution edge detection and region selection. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2000, 24:349–357. doi: 10.1016/s0895-6111(00)00037-9
3. Sipkins DA, Cheresh DA, Kazemi MR, Nevin LM, Bednarski MD, Li KCP. Detection of tumor angiogenesis in vivo by αvβ3-targeted magnetic resonance imaging. Nat Med 1998, 4:623–626. doi: 10.1038/nm0598-623
4. Hung AH, Duch MC, Parigi G, Rotz MW, Manus LM, Mastarone DJ, Dam KT, Gits CC, Macrenaris KW, Luchinat C, et al. Mechanisms of gadographene-mediated proton spin relaxation. J Phys Chem C Nanomater Interfaces 2013, 117. doi: 10.1021/jp406909b
5. Matosziuk LM, Leibowitz JH, Heffern MC, MacRenaris KW, Ratner MA, Meade TJ. Structural optimization of Zn(II)-activated magnetic resonance imaging probes. Inorg Chem 2013, 52:12250–12261. doi: 10.1021/ic400681j
6. Bulte JW, Kraitchman DL. Iron oxide MR contrast agents for molecular and cellular imaging. NMR Biomed 2004, 17:484–499. doi: 10.1002/nbm.924
7. Huang CH, Tsourkas A. Gd-based macromolecules and nanoparticles as magnetic resonance contrast agents for molecular imaging. Curr Top Med Chem 2013, 13:411–421
8. Tassa C, Duffner JL, Lewis TA, Weissleder R, Schreiber SL, Koehler AN, Shaw SY. Binding affinity and kinetic analysis of targeted small molecule-modified nanoparticles. Bioconjug Chem 2010, 21:14–19. doi: 10.1021/bc900438a
9. Janib SM, Moses AS, MacKay JA. Imaging and drug delivery using theranostic nanoparticles. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2010, 62:1052–1063. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2010.08.004
10. Bridot JL, Faure AC, Laurent S, Riviere C, Billotey C, Hiba B, Janier M, Josserand V, Coll JL, Elst LV, et al. Hybrid gadolinium oxide nanoparticles: multimodal contrast agents for in vivo imaging. J Am Chem Soc 2007, 129:5076–5084. doi: 10.1021/ja068356j
11. Wang AZ, Langer R, Farokhzad OC. Nanoparticle delivery of cancer drugs. Annu Rev Med 2012, 63:185–198. doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-040210-162544
12. Gao J, Xu B. Applications of nanomaterials inside cells. Nano Today 2009, 4:37–51. doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2008.10.009
13. Zhou Z, Lu ZR. Gadolinium-based contrast agents for magnetic resonance cancer imaging. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2013, 5:1–18. doi: 10.1002/wnan.1198
14. Konda SD, Aref M, Wang S, Brechbiel M, Wiener EC. Specific targeting of folate–dendrimer MRI contrast agents to the high affinity folate receptor expressed in ovarian tumor xenografts. MAGMA 2001, 12:104–113. doi: 10.1007/bf02668091
15. Saito R, Krauze MT, Bringas JR, Noble C, McKnight TR, Jackson P, Wendland MF, Mamot C, Drummond DC, Kirpotin DB, et al. Gadolinium-loaded liposomes allow for real-time magnetic resonance imaging of convection-enhanced delivery in the primate brain. Exp Neurol 2005, 196:381–389. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2005.08.016
16. Mulder WJ, Koole R, Brandwijk RJ, Storm G, Chin PT, Strijkers GJ, de Mello Donega C, Nicolay K, Griffioen AW. Quantum dots with a paramagnetic coating as a bimodal molecular imaging probe. Nano Lett 2006, 6:1–6. doi: 10.1021/nl051935m
17. Taylor KM, Kim JS, Rieter WJ, An H, Lin W, Lin W. Mesoporous silica nanospheres as highly efficient MRI contrast agents. J Am Chem Soc 2008, 130:2154–2155. doi: 10.1021/ja710193c
18. Ananta JS, Godin B, Sethi R, Moriggi L, Liu X, Serda RE, Krishnamurthy R, Muthupillai R, Bolskar RD, Helm L, et al. Geometrical confinement of gadolinium-based contrast agents in nanoporous particles enhances T1 contrast. Nat Nanotechnol 2010, 5:815–821. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2010.203
19. Na HB, Song IC, Hyeon T. Inorganic nanoparticles for MRI contrast agents. Adv Mater 2009, 21:2133–2148. doi: 10.1002/adma.200802366
20. Evanics F, Diamente PR, van Veggel FCJM, Stanisz GJ, Prosser RS. Water-soluble GdF3 and GdF3/LaF3 nanoparticles physical characterization and NMR relaxation properties. Chem Mater 2006, 18:2499–2505. doi: 10.1021/cm052299w
21. Dumont MF, Baligand C, Li Y, Knowles ES, Meisel MW, Walter GA, Talham DR. DNA surface modified gadolinium phosphate nanoparticles as MRI contrast agents. Bioconjug Chem 2012, 23:951–957. doi: 10.1021/bc200553h
22. Shin J, Anisur RM, Ko MK, Im GH, Lee JH, Lee IS. Hollow manganese oxide nanoparticles as multifunctional agents for magnetic resonance imaging and drug delivery. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2009, 48:321–324. doi: 10.1002/anie.200802323
23. Caravan P, Ellison JJ, McMurry TJ, Lauffer RB. Gadolinium(III) chelates as MRI contrast agents: structure, dynamics, and applications. Chem Rev 1999, 99:2293–2352. doi: 10.1021/cr980440x
24. Wiener E, Brechbiel MW, Brothers H, Magin RL, Gansow OA, Tomalia DA, Lauterbur PC. Dendrimer-based metal chelates: a new class of magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. Magn Reson Med 1994, 31:1–8. doi: 10.1002/mrm.1910310102
25. Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J, Requardt M, Weinmann HJ. Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol 2005, 40:715–724. doi: 10.1097/01.rli.0000184756.66360.d3
26. Huang CH, Nwe K, Al Zaki A, Brechbiel MW, Tsourkas A. Biodegradable polydisulfide dendrimer nanoclusters as MRI contrast agents. ACS Nano 2012, 6:9416–9424. doi: 10.1021/nn304160p
27. Perazella MA. Current status of gadolinium toxicity in patients with kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009, 4:461–469. doi: 10.2215/CJN.06011108
28. Bryant LH, Jr, Brechbiel MW, Wu C, Bulte JW, Herynek V, Frank JA. Synthesis and relaxometry of high-generation (G = 5, 7, 9, and 10) PAMAM dendrimer-DOTA-gadolinium chelates. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 9:348–352
29. Preslar AT, Parigi G, McClendon MT, Sefick SS, Moyer TJ, Haney CR, Waters EA, MacRenaris KW, Luchinat C, Stupp SI, et al. Gd(III)-labeled peptide nanofibers for reporting on biomaterial localization in vivo. ACS Nano 2014, 8:7325–7332. doi: 10.1021/nn502393u
30. Li A, Wong CS, Wong MK, Lee CM, Au Yeung MC. Acute adverse reactions to magnetic resonance contrast media—gadolinium chelates. Br J Radiol 2006, 79:368–371. doi: 10.1259/bjr/88469693
31. Ghaghada KB, Ravoori M, Sabapathy D, Bankson J, Kundra V, Annapragada A. New dual mode gadolinium nanoparticle contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging. PLoS One 2009, 4:e7628. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007628
32. Cheng Z, Thorek DL, Tsourkas A. Gadolinium-conjugated dendrimer nanoclusters as a tumor-targeted T1 magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2010, 49:346–350. doi: 10.1002/anie.200905133
33. Lu ZR, Mohs AM, Zong Y, Feng Y. Polydisulfide Gd(III) chelates as biodegradable macromolecular magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. Int J Nanomed 2006, 1:31–40. doi: 10.2147/nano.2006.1.1.31
34. Ke T, Feng Y, Guo J, Parker DL, Lu ZR. Biodegradable cystamine spacer facilitates the clearance of Gd(III) chelates in poly(glutamic acid) Gd-DO3A conjugates for contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2006, 24:931–940. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2006.03.009
35. Zong Y, Wang X, Jeong EK, Parker DL, Lu ZR. Structural effect on degradability and in vivo contrast enhancement of polydisulfide Gd(III) complexes as biodegradable macromolecular MRI contrast agents. Magn Reson Imaging 2009, 27:503–511. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2008.07.020
36. Allen TM, Hansen C, Martin F, Redemann C, Yau-Young A. Liposomes containing synthetic lipid derivatives of poly(ethylene glycol) show prolonged circulation half-lives in vivo. Biochim Biophys Acta 1991, 1066:29–36. doi: 10.1016/0005-2736(91)90246-5
37. Mulder WJ, Strijkers GJ, Griffioen AW, van Bloois L, Molema G, Storm G, Koning GA, Nicolay K. A liposomal system for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of molecular targets. Bioconjug Chem 2004, 15:799–806. doi: 10.1021/bc049949r
38. Ghaghada K, Hawley C, Kawaji K, Annapragada A, Mukundan S, Jr. T1 relaxivity of core-encapsulated gadolinium liposomal contrast agents—effect of liposome size and internal gadolinium concentration. Acad Radiol 2008, 15:1259–1263. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2008.04.018
39. Bull SR, Guler MO, Bras RE, Venkatasubramanian PN, Stupp SI, Meade TJ. Magnetic resonance imaging of self-assembled biomaterial scaffolds. Bioconjug Chem 2005, 16:1343–1348. doi: 10.1021/bc050153h
40. Webber MJ, Kessler JA, Stupp SI. Emerging peptide nanomedicine to regenerate tissues and organs. J Intern Med 2010, 267:71–88. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2009.02184.x
41. Ortony JH, Newcomb CJ, Matson JB, Palmer LC, Doan PE, Hoffman BM, Stupp SI. Internal dynamics of a supramolecular nanofibre. Nat Mater 2014, 13:812–816. doi: 10.1038/nmat3979
42. Nicolle GM, Toth E, Eisenwiener KP, Macke HR, Merbach AE. From monomers to micelles: investigation of the parameters influencing proton relaxivity. J Biol Inorg Chem 2002, 7:757–769. doi: 10.1007/s00775-002-0353-3
43. Bull SR, Guler MO, Bras RE, Meade TJ, Stupp SI. Self-assembled peptide amphiphile nanofibers conjugated to MRI contrast agents. Nano Lett 2005, 5:1–4. doi: 10.1021/nl0484898
44. Liu S, Zhang P, Banerjee SR, Xu J, Pomper MG, Cui H. Design and assembly of supramolecular dual-modality nanoprobes. Nanoscale 2015, 7:9462–9466. doi: 10.1039/c5nr01518a
45. Appel AA, Anastasio MA, Larson JC, Brey EM. Imaging challenges in biomaterials and tissue engineering. Biomaterials 2013, 34:6615–6630. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.05.033
46. Griffioen AW. Anti-angiogenesis: making the tumor vulnerable to the immune system. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2008, 57:1553–1558. doi: 10.1007/s00262-008-0524-3
47. Tsai CP, Hung Y, Chou YH, Huang DM, Hsiao JK, Chang C, Chen YC, Mou CY. High-contrast paramagnetic fluorescent mesoporous silica nanorods as a multifunctional cell-imaging probe. Small 2008, 4:186–191. doi: 10.1002/smll.200700457
48. Gerion D, Herberg J, Bok R, Gjersing E, Ramon E, Maxwell R, Kurhanewicz J, Budinger TF, Gray JW, Shuman MA, et al. Paramagnetic silica-coated nanocrystals as an advanced MRI contrast agent. J Phys Chem C 2007, 111:12542–12551. doi: 10.1021/jp074072p
49. Hifumi H, Yamaoka S, Tanimoto A, Akatsu T, Shindo Y, Honda A, Citterio D, Oka K, Kuribayashi S, Suzuki K. Dextran coated gadolinium phosphate nanoparticles for magnetic resonance tumor imaging. J Mater Chem 2009, 19:6393. doi: 10.1039/b902134e
50. Park JY, Baek MJ, Choi ES, Woo S, Kim JH, Kim TJ, Jung JC, Chae KS, Chang Y, Lee GH. Paramagnetic ultrasmall gadolinium oxide nanoparticles as advanced T1 MRI contrast agent: account for large longitudinal relaxivity, optimal particle diameter, and in vivo T1 MR images. ACS Nano 2009, 3:3663–3669. doi: 10.1021/nn900761s
51. Faucher L, Tremblay M, Lagueux J, Gossuin Y, Fortin MA. Rapid synthesis of PEGylated ultrasmall gadolinium oxide nanoparticles for cell labeling and tracking with MRI. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2012, 4:4506–4515. doi: 10.1021/am3006466
52. Pan D, Schmieder AH, Wickline SA, Lanza GM. Manganese-based MRI contrast agents: past, present and future. Tetrahedron 2011, 67:8431–8444. doi: 10.1016/j.tet.2011.07.076
53. Martin DR, Krishnamoorthy SK, Kalb B, Salman KN, Sharma P, Carew JD, Martin PA, Chapman AB, Ray GL, Larsen CP, et al. Decreased incidence of NSF in patients on dialysis after changing gadolinium contrast-enhanced MRI protocols. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010, 31:440–446. doi: 10.1002/jmri.22024
54. Cai X, Gao W, Ma M, Wu M, Zhang L, Zheng Y, Chen H, Shi J. A prussian blue-based core-shell hollow-structured mesoporous nanoparticle as a smart theranostic agent with ultrahigh pH-responsive longitudinal relaxivity. Adv Mater 2015. doi: 10.1002/adma.201503381
55. Kim T, Momin E, Choi J, Yuan K, Zaidi H, Kim J, Park M, Lee N, McMahon MT, Quinones-Hinojosa A, et al. Mesoporous silica-coated hollow manganese oxide nanoparticles as positive T1 contrast agents for labeling and MRI tracking of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells. J Am Chem Soc 2011, 133:2955–2961. doi: 10.1021/ja1084095
56. Gilad AA, Walczak P, McMahon MT, Na HB, Lee JH, An K, Hyeon T, van Zijl PC, Bulte JW. MR tracking of transplanted cells with "positive contrast" using manganese oxide nanoparticles. Magn Reson Med 2008, 60:1–7. doi: 10.1002/mrm.21622
57. Yang H, Zhuang Y, Hu H, Du X, Zhang C, Shi X, Wu H, Yang S. Silica-coated manganese oxide nanoparticles as a platform for targeted magnetic resonance and fluorescence imaging of cancer cells. Adv Funct Mater 2010, 20:1733–1741. doi: 10.1002/adfm.200902445
58. Lee N, Hyeon T. Designed synthesis of uniformly sized iron oxide nanoparticles for efficient magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. Chem Soc Rev 2012, 41:2575–2589. doi: 10.1039/c1cs15248c
59. Zhu J, Zhou L, XingWu F. Tracking neural stem cells in patients with brain trauma. N Engl J Med 2006, 355:2376–2378. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc055304
60. Wang YX. Superparamagnetic iron oxide based MRI contrast agents: current status of clinical application. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2011, 1:35–40. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4292.2011.08.03
61. Harisinghani MG, Barentsz J, Hahn PF, Deserno WM, Tabatabaei S, van de Kaa CH, de la Rosette J, Weissleder R. Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2003, 348:2491–2499. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa022749
62. Sankineni S, Brown AM, Fascelli M, Law YM, Pinto PA, Choyke PL, Turkbey B. Lymph node staging in prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep 2015, 16:30. doi: 10.1007/s11934-015-0505-y
63. Heesakkers RA, Jager GJ, Hovels AM, de Hoop B, van den Bosch HC, Raat F, Witjes JA, Mulders PF, van der Kaa CH, Barentsz JO. Prostate cancer: detection of lymph node metastases outside the routine surgical area with ferumoxtran-10-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2009, 251:408–414. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2512071018
64. Jun YW, Huh YM, Choi JS, Lee JH, Song HT, Kim S, Yoon S, Kim KS, Shin JS, Suh JS, et al. Nanoscale size effect of magnetic nanocrystals and their utilization for cancer diagnosis via magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Chem Soc 2005, 127:5732–5733. doi: 10.1021/ja0422155
65. Hadjipanayis CG, Bonder MJ, Balakrishnan S, Wang X, Mao H, Hadjipanayis GC. Metallic iron nanoparticles for MRI contrast enhancement and local hyperthermia. Small 2008, 4:1925–1929. doi: 10.1002/smll.200800261
66. Tong S, Hou S, Zheng Z, Zhou J, Bao G. Coating optimization of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for high T2 relaxivity. Nano Lett 2010, 10:4607–4613. doi: 10.1021/nl102623x
67. Yoffe S, Leshuk T, Everett P, Gu F. Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs): synthesis and surface modification techniques for use with MRI and other biomedical applications. Curr Pharm Des 2013, 19:493–509
68. Wu W, He Q, Jiang C. Magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles: synthesis and surface functionalization strategies. Nanoscale Res Lett 2008, 3:397–415. doi: 10.1007/s11671-008-9174-9
69. Gupta AK, Gupta M. Synthesis and surface engineering of iron oxide nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Biomaterials 2005, 26:3995–4021. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.10.012
70. Tromsdorf UI, Bigall NC, Kaul MG, Bruns OT, Nikolic MS, Mollwitz B, Sperling RA, Reimer R, Hohenberg H, Parak WJ, et al. Size and surface effects on the MRI relaxivity of manganese ferrite nanoparticle contrast agents. Nano Lett 2007, 7:2422–2427. doi: 10.1021/nl071099b
71. Xu C, Xu K, Gu H, Zheng R, Liu H, Zhang X, Guo Z, Xu B. Dopamine as a robust anchor to immobilize functional molecules on the iron oxide shell of magnetic nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc 2004, 126:9938–9939. doi: 10.1021/ja0464802
72. Yee C, Kataby G, Ulman A, Prozorov T, White H, King A, Rafailovich M, Sokolov J, Gedanken A. Self-assembled monolayers of alkanesulfonic and -phosphonic acids on amorphous iron oxide nanoparticles. Langmuir 1999, 15:7111–7115. doi: 10.1021/la990663y
73. Daou TJ, Greneche JM, Pourroy G, Buathong S, Derory A, Ulhaq-Bouillet C, Donnio B, Guillon D, Begin-Colin S. Coupling agent effect on magnetic properties of functionalized magnetite-based nanoparticles. Chem Mater 2008, 20:5869–5875. doi: 10.1021/cm801405n
74. Sahoo Y, Pizem H, Fried T, Golodnitsky D, Burstein L, Sukenik CN, Markovich G. Alkyl phosphonate/phosphate coating on magnetite nanoparticles: a comparison with fatty acids. Langmuir 2001, 17:7907–7911. doi: 10.1021/la010703+
75. Shultz MD, Reveles JU, Khanna SN, Carpenter EE. Reactive nature of dopamine as a surface functionalization agent in iron oxide nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc 2007, 129:2482–2487. doi: 10.1021/ja0651963
76. Gao J, Gu H, Xu B. Multifunctional magnetic nanoparticles: design, synthesis, and biomedical applications. Acc Chem Res 2009, 42:1097–1107. doi: 10.1021/ar9000026
77. Smolensky ED, Park HY, Berquo TS, Pierre VC. Surface functionalization of magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for MRI applications—effect of anchoring group and ligand exchange protocol. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 2011, 6:189–199. doi: 10.1002/cmmi.417
78. Smolensky ED, Neary MC, Zhou Y, Berquo TS, Pierre VC. Fe3O4@organic@Au: core-shell nanocomposites with high saturation magnetisation as magnetoplasmonic MRI contrast agents. Chem Commun (Camb) 2011, 47:2149–2151. doi: 10.1039/c0cc03746j
79. Daniel MC, Astruc D. Gold nanoparticles: assembly, supramolecular chemistry, quantum-size-related properties, and applications toward biology, catalysis, and nanotechnology. Chem Rev 2004, 104:293–346. doi: 10.1021/cr030698+
80. Tanaka K, Narita A, Kitamura N, Uchiyama W, Morita M, Inubushi T, Chujo Y. Preparation for highly sensitive MRI contrast agents using core/shell type nanoparticles consisting of multiple SPIO cores with thin silica coating. Langmuir 2010, 26:11759–11762. doi: 10.1021/la1015077
81. Kohler N, Fryxell GE, Zhang M. A bifunctional poly(ethylene glycol) silane immobilized on metallic oxide-based nanoparticles for conjugation with cell targeting agents. J Am Chem Soc 2004, 126:7206–7211. doi: 10.1021/ja049195r
82. Kim J, Kim HS, Lee N, Kim T, Kim H, Yu T, Song IC, Moon WK, Hyeon T. Multifunctional uniform nanoparticles composed of a magnetite nanocrystal core and a mesoporous silica shell for magnetic resonance and fluorescence imaging and for drug delivery. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2008, 47:8438–8441. doi: 10.1002/anie.200802469
83. Adams ML, Lavasanifar A, Kwon GS. Amphiphilic block copolymers for drug delivery. J Pharm Sci 2003, 92:1343–1355. doi: 10.1002/jps.10397
84. Viger ML, Sankaranarayanan J, de Gracia Lux C, Chan M, Almutairi A. Collective activation of MRI agents via encapsulation and disease-triggered release. J Am Chem Soc 2013, 135:7847–7850. doi: 10.1021/ja403167p
85. Kim T, Cho E-J, Chae Y, Kim M, Oh A, Jin J, Lee E-S, Baik H, Haam S, Suh J-S, et al. Urchin-shaped manganese oxide nanoparticles as pH-responsive activatable T1 contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging. Angew Chem 2011, 123:10777–10781. doi: 10.1002/ange.201103108
86. Crayton SH, Tsourkas A. pH-titratable superparamagnetic iron oxide for improved nanoparticle accumulation in acidic tumor microenvironments. ACS Nano 2011, 5:9592–9601. doi: 10.1021/nn202863x
87. Ye D, Shuhendler AJ, Pandit P, Brewer KD, Tee SS, Cui L, Tikhomirov G, Rutt B, Rao J. Caspase-responsive smart gadolinium-based contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging of drug-induced apoptosis. Chem Sci 2014, 4:3845–3852. doi: 10.1039/C4SC01392A
88. Yoo B, Pagel MD. A PARACEST MRI contrast agent to detect enzyme activity. J Am Chem Soc 2006, 128:14032–14033. doi: 10.1021/ja063874f
89. Mizukami S, Takikawa R, Sugihara F, Shirakawa M, Kikuchi K. Dual-function probe to detect protease activity for fluorescence measurement and 19F MRI. Angew Chem 2009, 121:3695–3697. doi: 10.1002/ange.200806328
90. Liu G, Song X, Chan KW, McMahon MT. Nuts and bolts of chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI. NMR Biomed 2013, 26:810–828. doi: 10.1002/nbm.2899
91. van Zijl PC, Yadav NN. Chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST): what is in a name and what isn't? Magn Reson Med 2011, 65:927–948. doi: 10.1002/mrm.22761
92. Wang X, Wu Y, Soesbe TC, Yu J, Zhao P, Kiefer GE, Sherry AD. A pH-responsive MRI agent that can be activated beyond the tissue magnetization transfer window. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2015, 54:8662–8664. doi: 10.1002/anie.201502497
93. McVicar N, Li AX, Suchy M, Hudson RH, Menon RS, Bartha R. Simultaneous in vivo pH and temperature mapping using a PARACEST-MRI contrast agent. Magn Reson Med 2013, 70:1016–1025. doi: 10.1002/mrm.24539
94. Delli Castelli D, Terreno E, Aime S. Yb(III)-HPDO3A: a dual pH- and temperature-responsive CEST agent. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2011, 50:1798–1800. doi: 10.1002/anie.201007105
95. Hingorani DV, Randtke EA, Pagel MD. A catalyCEST MRI contrast agent that detects the enzyme-catalyzed creation of a covalent bond. J Am Chem Soc 2013, 135:6396–6398. doi: 10.1021/ja400254e
96. Ratnakar SJ, Viswanathan S, Kovacs Z, Jindal AK, Green KN, Sherry AD. Europium(III) DOTA–tetraamide complexes as redox-active MRI sensors. J Am Chem Soc 2012, 134:5798–5800. doi: 10.1021/ja211601k
97. Liu G, Liang Y, Bar-Shir A, Chan KW, Galpoththawela CS, Bernard SM, Tse T, Yadav NN, Walczak P, McMahon MT, et al. Monitoring enzyme activity using a diamagnetic chemical exchange saturation transfer magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent. J Am Chem Soc 2011, 133:16326–16329. doi: 10.1021/ja204701x
98. De Leon-Rodriguez LM, Lubag AJ, Malloy CR, Martinez GV, Gillies RJ, Sherry AD. Responsive MRI agents for sensing metabolism in vivo. Acc Chem Res 2009, 42:948–957. doi: 10.1021/ar800237f
99. Zhang S, Trokowski R, Sherry AD. A paramagnetic CEST agent for imaging glucose by MRI. J Am Chem Soc 2003, 125:15288–15289. doi: 10.1021/ja038345f
100. Liu GS, Li YG, Pagel MD. Design and characterization of a new irreversible responsive PARACEST MRI contrast agent that detects nitric oxide. Magn Reson Med 2007, 58:1249–1256. doi: 10.1002/mrm.21428
101. Ward KM, Aletras AH, Balaban RS. A new class of contrast agents for MRI based on proton chemical exchange dependent saturation transfer (CEST). J Magn Reson 2000, 143:79–87. doi: 10.1006/jmre.1999.1956
102. Goffeney N, Bulte JWM, Duyn J, Bryant LH, van Zijl PCM. Sensitive NMR detection of cationic-polymer-based gene delivery systems using saturation transfer via proton exchange. J Am Chem Soc 2001, 123:8628–8629. doi: 10.1021/ja0158455
103. Ferrauto G, Carniato F, Tei L, Hu H, Aime S, Botta M. MRI nanoprobes based on chemical exchange saturation transfer: Ln(III) chelates anchored on the surface of mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Nanoscale 2014, 6:9604–9607. doi: 10.1039/c4nr02753a
104. Aime S, Castelli DD, Crich SG, Gianolio E, Terreno E. Pushing the sensitivity envelope of lanthanide-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agents for molecular imaging applications. Acc Chem Res 2009, 42:822–831. doi: 10.1021/ar800192p
105. Aime S, Delli Castelli D, Terreno E. Highly sensitive MRI chemical exchange saturation transfer agents using liposomes. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2005, 44:5513–5515. doi: 10.1002/anie.200501473
106. Aime S, Castelli DD, Terreno E. Lanthanide-loaded paramagnetic liposomes as switchable magnetically oriented nanovesicles Methods Enzymol 2009, 464:193–210. doi: 10.1016/s0076-6879(09)64010-6
107. Terreno E, Barge A, Beltrami L, Cravotto G, Castelli DD, Fedeli F, Jebasingh B, Aime S. Highly shifted LIPOCEST agents based on the encapsulation of neutral polynuclear paramagnetic shift reagents. Chem Commun (Camb) 2008:600–602. doi: 10.1039/b715383j
108. Zhang S, Zhou K, Huang G, Takahashi M, Sherry AD, Gao J. A novel class of polymeric pH-responsive MRI CEST agents. Chem Commun (Camb) 2013, 49:6418–6420. doi: 10.1039/c3cc42452a
109. Aime S, Frullano L, Geninatti Crich S. Compartmentalization of a gadolinium complex in the apoferritin cavity: a route to obtain high relaxivity contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2002, 41:1017–1019
110. Vasalatiy O, Zhao P, Zhang S, Aime S, Sherry AD. Catalytic effects of apoferritin interior surface residues on water proton exchange in lanthanide complexes. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 2006, 1:10–14. doi: 10.1002/cmmi.93
111. Carniato F, Tei L, Arrais A, Marchese L, Botta M. Selective anchoring of Gd(III) chelates on the external surface of organo-modified mesoporous silica nanoparticles: a new chemical strategy to enhance relaxivity. Chemistry 2013, 19:1421–1428. doi: 10.1002/chem.201202670