PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy of polydisulfide-based biodegradable macromolecular contrast agents of different degradability and molecular weight for tumor characterization based on angiogenesis using dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI). METHODS: Biodegradable macromolecular MRI contrast agents, Gd-DTPA cystamine copolymers (GDCC) and Gd-DTPA cystine copolymers (GDCP), with molecular weight of 20 and 70 KDa were evaluated for tumor characterization. Gd(DTPA-BMA) and a prototype of macromolecular contrast agent, albumin-(Gd-DTPA), were used as controls. The DCE-MRI studies were performed in nude mice bearing MDA PCa 2b and PC-3 human prostate tumor xenografts. Tumor angiogenic kinetic parameters including endothelium transfer coefficient (K(trans)) and fractional tumor plasma volume (f(PV)) were calculated from the DCE-MRI data using a two-compartment model and compared between the two different tumor models for each contrast agent. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the f(PV) values between two tumor models estimated with the same agent except for GDCC-70. The K(trans) values in both tumor models decreased with the increase of molecular weight of contrast agents. With the same high molecular weight (70 KDa), GDCC-70 showed a higher K(trans) values than GDCP-70 due to high degradability of the former in both tumor models (p < 0.05). The K(trans) values of MDA PCa 2b tumors were significantly higher than those of PC-3 tumors estimated by Gd(DTPA-BMA), GDCC-20, GDCC-70, GDCP-70, and albumin-(Gd-DTPA) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The polydisulfide-based biodegradable macromolecular MRI contrast agents are promising in tumor characterization and differentiation with dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.
PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy of polydisulfide-based biodegradable macromolecular contrast agents of different degradability and molecular weight for tumor characterization based on angiogenesis using dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI). METHODS: Biodegradable macromolecular MRI contrast agents, Gd-DTPA cystamine copolymers (GDCC) and Gd-DTPA cystine copolymers (GDCP), with molecular weight of 20 and 70 KDa were evaluated for tumor characterization. Gd(DTPA-BMA) and a prototype of macromolecular contrast agent, albumin-(Gd-DTPA), were used as controls. The DCE-MRI studies were performed in nude mice bearing MDA PCa 2b and PC-3humanprostate tumor xenografts. Tumor angiogenic kinetic parameters including endothelium transfer coefficient (K(trans)) and fractional tumor plasma volume (f(PV)) were calculated from the DCE-MRI data using a two-compartment model and compared between the two different tumor models for each contrast agent. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the f(PV) values between two tumor models estimated with the same agent except for GDCC-70. The K(trans) values in both tumor models decreased with the increase of molecular weight of contrast agents. With the same high molecular weight (70 KDa), GDCC-70 showed a higher K(trans) values than GDCP-70 due to high degradability of the former in both tumor models (p < 0.05). The K(trans) values of MDA PCa 2b tumors were significantly higher than those of PC-3tumors estimated by Gd(DTPA-BMA), GDCC-20, GDCC-70, GDCP-70, and albumin-(Gd-DTPA) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The polydisulfide-based biodegradable macromolecular MRI contrast agents are promising in tumor characterization and differentiation with dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.
Authors: A A Bogdanov; R Weissleder; H W Frank; A V Bogdanova; N Nossif; B K Schaffer; E Tsai; M I Papisov; T J Brady Journal: Radiology Date: 1993-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: C F van Dijke; R C Brasch; T P Roberts; N Weidner; A Mathur; D M Shames; J S Mann; F Demsar; P Lang; H C Schwickert Journal: Radiology Date: 1996-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: H Daldrup; D M Shames; M Wendland; Y Okuhata; T M Link; W Rosenau; Y Lu; R C Brasch Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: N M Navone; M Olive; M Ozen; R Davis; P Troncoso; S M Tu; D Johnston; A Pollack; S Pathak; A C von Eschenbach; C J Logothetis Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 1997-12 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: T S Desser; D L Rubin; H H Muller; F Qing; S Khodor; G Zanazzi; S W Young; D L Ladd; J A Wellons; K E Kellar Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 1994 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Mingqian Tan; Susan M Burden-Gulley; Wen Li; Xueming Wu; Daniel Lindner; Susann M Brady-Kalnay; Vikas Gulani; Zheng-Rong Lu Journal: Pharm Res Date: 2011-12-03 Impact factor: 4.200
Authors: Juan L Vivero-Escoto; Kathryn M L Taylor-Pashow; Rachel C Huxford; Joseph Della Rocca; Christie Okoruwa; Hongyu An; Weili Lin; Wenbin Lin Journal: Small Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 13.281
Authors: Yuguo Li; Yuan Qiao; Hanwei Chen; Renyuan Bai; Verena Staedtke; Zheng Han; Jiadi Xu; Kannie W Y Chan; Nirbhay Yadav; Jeff W M Bulte; Shibin Zhou; Peter C M van Zijl; Guanshu Liu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Hanwei Chen; Dexiang Liu; Yuguo Li; Xiang Xu; Jiadi Xu; Nirbhay N Yadav; Shibin Zhou; Peter C M van Zijl; Guanshu Liu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 3.737