Literature DB >> 17614731

Quantitative comparison of tissue oxygen and motexafin lutetium uptake by ex vivo and noninvasive in vivo techniques in patients with intraperitoneal carcinomatosis.

Hsing-Wen Wang1, Jarod C Finlay, Kijoon Lee, Timothy C Zhu, Mary E Putt, Eli Glatstein, Cameron J Koch, Sydney M Evans, Steve M Hahn, Theresa M Busch, Arjun G Yodh.   

Abstract

Near-infrared diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS) has been used to noninvasively monitor optical properties during photodynamic therapy (PDT). This technique has been extensively validated in tissue phantoms; however, validation in patients has been limited. This pilot study compares blood oxygenation and photosensitizer tissue uptake measured by multiwavelength DRS with ex vivo assays of the hypoxia marker, 2-(2-nitroimida-zol-1[H]-yl)-N-(2,2,3,3,3-pentafluoropropyl)acetamide (EF5), and the photosensitizer (motexafin lutetium, MLu) from tissues at the same tumor site of three tumors in two patients with intra-abdominal cancers. Similar in vivo and ex vivo measurements of MLu concentration are carried out in murine radiation-induced fibrosarcoma (RIF) tumors (n=9). The selection of optimal DRS wavelength range and source-detector separations is discussed and implemented, and the association between in vivo and ex vivo measurements is examined. The results demonstrate a negative correlation between blood oxygen saturation (StO(2)) and EF5 binding, consistent with published relationships between EF5 binding and electrode measured pO(2), and between electrode measured pO(2) and StO(2). A tight correspondence is observed between in vivo DRS and ex vivo measured MLu concentration in the RIF tumors; similar data are positively correlated in the human intraperitoneal tumors. These results further demonstrate the potential of in vivo DRS measurements in clinical PDT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17614731     DOI: 10.1117/1.2743082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Opt        ISSN: 1083-3668            Impact factor:   3.170


  6 in total

1.  Optical mammography: Diffuse optical imaging of breast cancer.

Authors:  Kijoon Lee
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-01-10

2.  Measuring the Physiologic Properties of Oral Lesions Receiving Fractionated Photodynamic Therapy.

Authors:  Shannon M Gallagher-Colombo; Harry Quon; Kelly M Malloy; Peter H Ahn; Keith A Cengel; Charles B Simone; Ara A Chalian; Bert W O'Malley; Gregory S Weinstein; Timothy C Zhu; Mary E Putt; Jarod C Finlay; Theresa M Busch
Journal:  Photochem Photobiol       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 3.421

3.  Hemodynamic and metabolic diffuse optical monitoring in a mouse model of hindlimb ischemia.

Authors:  Rickson C Mesquita; Nicolas Skuli; Meeri N Kim; Jiaming Liang; Steve Schenkel; Amar J Majmundar; M Celeste Simon; Arjun G Yodh
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 3.732

4.  Quantitative physiology and immunohistochemistry of oral lesions.

Authors:  Li-Tzu Lee; Po-Hsiung Chen; Chiou-Tuz Chang; John Wang; Yong-Kie Wong; Hsing-Wen Wang
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 3.732

Review 5.  Photodynamic Therapy for Cancer: What's Past is Prologue.

Authors:  Michael R Hamblin
Journal:  Photochem Photobiol       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 3.421

6.  Optical monitoring and detection of spinal cord ischemia.

Authors:  Rickson C Mesquita; Angela D'Souza; Thomas V Bilfinger; Robert M Galler; Asher Emanuel; Steven S Schenkel; Arjun G Yodh; Thomas F Floyd
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-16       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.