PURPOSE: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a lethal disease afflicting many thousands of patients worldwide. We have previously developed an oral thioacetamide (TAA)-induced model of rat CCA that recapitulates the histologic progression of human CCA. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of animal PET in detecting CCA in the setting of the TAA rat model. PROCEDURES: Male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 30) were used in this study. Drinking water with TAA 300 mg/l was administered orally in 26 rats, and animal PET was performed at 20 weeks after initiation of TAA. A total of four rats served as controls. Animal PET images were acquired sequentially using both C-11 acetate and 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) to determine the optimal tracer. Dynamic animal PET images were collected to assess the optimal scan time based on the highest tumor-to-liver (T/L) ratio using time-activity curves. Animal PET findings were compared lesion by lesion with the results of autoradiography and the histological data. RESULTS: FDG animal PET images had a higher T/L ratio compared to images obtained with C-11 acetate as a marker. The optimal scan time for FDG animal PET was determined as 90 min postinjection of the tracer. This was when the T/L ratio reached its peak. Necropsy and histology confirmed the presence of TAA-induced CCA in 22 rats (84.6 %). Static animal PET images showed intense FDG uptake in 17 of the 22 tumor-bearing animals (77.3%). The average T/L ratio was 1.60 +/- 0.09. The sensitivity and specificity of animal PET in the detection of CCA were 77% (17/22) and 100% (4/4), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that animal PET in the setting of the TAA rat model seems to be feasible for the detection of CCA. Future translational studies are needed to confirm and expand our findings.
PURPOSE:Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a lethal disease afflicting many thousands of patients worldwide. We have previously developed an oral thioacetamide (TAA)-induced model of rat CCA that recapitulates the histologic progression of human CCA. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of animal PET in detecting CCA in the setting of the TAA rat model. PROCEDURES: Male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 30) were used in this study. Drinking water with TAA 300 mg/l was administered orally in 26 rats, and animal PET was performed at 20 weeks after initiation of TAA. A total of four rats served as controls. Animal PET images were acquired sequentially using both C-11 acetate and 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) to determine the optimal tracer. Dynamic animal PET images were collected to assess the optimal scan time based on the highest tumor-to-liver (T/L) ratio using time-activity curves. Animal PET findings were compared lesion by lesion with the results of autoradiography and the histological data. RESULTS:FDG animal PET images had a higher T/L ratio compared to images obtained with C-11 acetate as a marker. The optimal scan time for FDG animal PET was determined as 90 min postinjection of the tracer. This was when the T/L ratio reached its peak. Necropsy and histology confirmed the presence of TAA-induced CCA in 22 rats (84.6 %). Static animal PET images showed intense FDG uptake in 17 of the 22 tumor-bearing animals (77.3%). The average T/L ratio was 1.60 +/- 0.09. The sensitivity and specificity of animal PET in the detection of CCA were 77% (17/22) and 100% (4/4), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that animal PET in the setting of the TAA rat model seems to be feasible for the detection of CCA. Future translational studies are needed to confirm and expand our findings.
Authors: Jong Doo Lee; Woo Ick Yang; Young Nyun Park; Kyung Sik Kim; Jin Sub Choi; Mijin Yun; Dooheun Ko; Tae-Sung Kim; Arthur E H Cho; Hye Mi Kim; Kwang-Hyub Han; Seung-Soon Im; Yong-Ho Ahn; Chang Woon Choi; Jeon Han Park Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Gary J Kelloff; John M Hoffman; Bruce Johnson; Howard I Scher; Barry A Siegel; Edward Y Cheng; Bruce D Cheson; Joyce O'shaughnessy; Kathryn Z Guyton; David A Mankoff; Lalitha Shankar; Steven M Larson; Caroline C Sigman; Richard L Schilsky; Daniel C Sullivan Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2005-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: H Young; R Baum; U Cremerius; K Herholz; O Hoekstra; A A Lammertsma; J Pruim; P Price Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Boon-Keng Teo; Youngho Seo; Stephen L Bacharach; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Steven K Libutti; Himanshu Shukla; Bruce H Hasegawa; Randall A Hawkins; Benjamin L Franc Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Uwe J F Tietge; Oliver Selberg; Andreas Kreter; Matthias J Bahr; Matthias Pirlich; Wolfgang Burchert; Manfred J Müller; Michael P Manns; Klaus H W Böker Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Nicolas Salem; Gregory T MacLennan; Yu Kuang; Paul W Anderson; Steve J Schomisch; Ilia A Tochkov; Bud C Tennant; Zhenghong Lee Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2007 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.484
Authors: Luke Boulter; Rachel V Guest; Timothy J Kendall; David H Wilson; Davina Wojtacha; Andrew J Robson; Rachel A Ridgway; Kay Samuel; Nico Van Rooijen; Simon T Barry; Stephen J Wigmore; Owen J Sansom; Stuart J Forbes Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2015-02-17 Impact factor: 14.808