PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) with microbubbles targeted to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor type 2 (VEGFR2) for imaging tumor angiogenesis in two murine tumor models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Animal protocols were approved by the Institutional Administrative Panel on Laboratory Animal Care. A US contrast agent, consisting of encapsulated gaseous microbubbles, was developed specifically to bind to VEGFR2 (by using anti-VEGFR2 antibodies and biotin-streptavidin interaction) which is up-regulated on endothelial cells of tumor blood vessels. VEGFR2-targeted microbubbles (MB(V)), control microbubbles (MB(C)), and nonlabeled microbubbles (MB(N)) were tested for binding specificity on cells expressing VEGFR2 (mouse angiosarcoma SVR cells) and control cells (mouse skeletal myoblast C2C12 cells). Expression of mouse VEGFR2 in culture cells was tested with immunocytochemical and Western blot analysis. Contrast-enhanced US imaging with MB(V) and MB(C) was performed in 28 tumor-bearing nude mice (mouse angiosarcoma, n = 18; rat malignant glioma, n = 10). Differences were calculated by using analysis of variance. RESULTS: In cell culture, adherence of MB(V) on SVR cells (2.1 microbubbles per SVR cell) was significantly higher than adherence of control microbubbles (0.01-0.10 microbubble per SVR cell; P < .001) and significantly more MB(V) attached to SVR cells than to C2C12 cells (0.15 microbubble per C2C12 cell; P < .001). In vivo, contrast-enhanced US imaging showed significantly higher average video intensity when using MB(V) compared with MB(C) for angiosarcoma and malignant glioma tumors (P < .001). Results of immunohistochemical analysis confirmed VEGFR2 expression on vascular endothelial cells of both tumor types. CONCLUSION: US imaging with contrast microbubbles targeted to VEGFR2 allows noninvasive visualization of VEGFR2 expression in tumor vessels in mice. (c) RSNA, 2008
PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) with microbubbles targeted to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor type 2 (VEGFR2) for imaging tumor angiogenesis in two murinetumor models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Animal protocols were approved by the Institutional Administrative Panel on Laboratory Animal Care. A US contrast agent, consisting of encapsulated gaseous microbubbles, was developed specifically to bind to VEGFR2 (by using anti-VEGFR2 antibodies and biotin-streptavidin interaction) which is up-regulated on endothelial cells of tumor blood vessels. VEGFR2-targeted microbubbles (MB(V)), control microbubbles (MB(C)), and nonlabeled microbubbles (MB(N)) were tested for binding specificity on cells expressing VEGFR2 (mouseangiosarcoma SVR cells) and control cells (mouse skeletal myoblast C2C12 cells). Expression of mouseVEGFR2 in culture cells was tested with immunocytochemical and Western blot analysis. Contrast-enhanced US imaging with MB(V) and MB(C) was performed in 28 tumor-bearing nude mice (mouseangiosarcoma, n = 18; ratmalignant glioma, n = 10). Differences were calculated by using analysis of variance. RESULTS: In cell culture, adherence of MB(V) on SVR cells (2.1 microbubbles per SVR cell) was significantly higher than adherence of control microbubbles (0.01-0.10 microbubble per SVR cell; P < .001) and significantly more MB(V) attached to SVR cells than to C2C12 cells (0.15 microbubble per C2C12 cell; P < .001). In vivo, contrast-enhanced US imaging showed significantly higher average video intensity when using MB(V) compared with MB(C) for angiosarcoma and malignant glioma tumors (P < .001). Results of immunohistochemical analysis confirmed VEGFR2 expression on vascular endothelial cells of both tumor types. CONCLUSION: US imaging with contrast microbubbles targeted to VEGFR2 allows noninvasive visualization of VEGFR2 expression in tumor vessels in mice. (c) RSNA, 2008
Authors: Grzegorz Korpanty; Juliet G Carbon; Paul A Grayburn; Jason B Fleming; Rolf A Brekken Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-01-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: J L Arbiser; M A Moses; C A Fernandez; N Ghiso; Y Cao; N Klauber; D Frank; M Brownlee; E Flynn; S Parangi; H R Byers; J Folkman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1997-02-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Howard Leong-Poi; Jonathan Christiansen; Peter Heppner; Christopher W Lewis; Alexander L Klibanov; Sanjiv Kaul; Jonathan R Lindner Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-06-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Christopher Bachmann; Alexander L Klibanov; Timothy S Olson; Jason R Sonnenschein; Jesus Rivera-Nieves; Fabio Cominelli; Klaus F Ley; Jonathan R Lindner; Theresa T Pizarro Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Gregory E R Weller; Michael K K Wong; Ruth A Modzelewski; Erxiong Lu; Alexander L Klibanov; William R Wagner; Flordeliza S Villanueva Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-01-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: F S Villanueva; R J Jankowski; S Klibanov; M L Pina; S M Alber; S C Watkins; G H Brandenburger; W R Wagner Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-07-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Y Waerzeggers; P Monfared; T Viel; A Faust; K Kopka; M Schäfers; B Tavitian; A Winkeler; A Jacobs Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Christopher R Anderson; Joshua J Rychak; Marina Backer; Joseph Backer; Klaus Ley; Alexander L Klibanov Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: David S Wang; Cedric Panje; Marybeth A Pysz; Ramasamy Paulmurugan; Jarrett Rosenberg; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Michel Schneider; Jürgen K Willmann Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-06-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Sunitha V Bachawal; Kristin C Jensen; Amelie M Lutz; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Francois Tranquart; Lu Tian; Jürgen K Willmann Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2013-01-17 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Dongwoon Hyun; Lotfi Abou-Elkacem; Rakesh Bam; Leandra L Brickson; Carl D Herickhoff; Jeremy J Dahl Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2020-04-09 Impact factor: 10.048