CONTEXT: The current data analysis tools in nuclear medicine have not been used to evaluate intra organ regional deposition patterns of pharmaceutical aerosols in preclinical species. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates aerosol deposition patterns as a function of particle size in rats and mice using novel image analysis techniques. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Mice and rats were exposed to radiolabeled polydisperse aerosols at 0.5, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0 µm MMAD followed by SPECT/CT imaging for deposition analysis. Images were quantified for both macro deposition patterns and regional deposition analysis using the LRRI-developed Onion Model. RESULTS: The deposition fraction in both rats and mice was shown to increase as the particle size decreased, with greater lung deposition in rats at all particle sizes. The Onion Model indicated that the smaller particle sizes resulted in increased peripheral deposition. DISCUSSION: These data contrast the commonly used 10% deposition fraction for all aerosols between 1.0 and 5.0 µm and indicate that lung deposition fraction in this range does change with particle size. When compared to historical data, the 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0 µm particles result in similar lung deposition fractions; however, the 0.5 µm lung deposition fraction is markedly different. This is probably caused by the current aerosols that were polydisperse to reflect current pharmaceutical aerosols, while the historical data were generated with monodisperse aerosols. CONCLUSION: The deposition patterns of aerosols between 0.5 and 5.0 µm showed an increase in both overall and peripheral deposition as the particle size decreased. The Onion Model allows a more complex analysis of regional deposition in preclinical models.
CONTEXT: The current data analysis tools in nuclear medicine have not been used to evaluate intra organ regional deposition patterns of pharmaceutical aerosols in preclinical species. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates aerosol deposition patterns as a function of particle size in rats and mice using novel image analysis techniques. MATERIALS AND METHOD:Mice and rats were exposed to radiolabeled polydisperse aerosols at 0.5, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0 µm MMAD followed by SPECT/CT imaging for deposition analysis. Images were quantified for both macro deposition patterns and regional deposition analysis using the LRRI-developed Onion Model. RESULTS: The deposition fraction in both rats and mice was shown to increase as the particle size decreased, with greater lung deposition in rats at all particle sizes. The Onion Model indicated that the smaller particle sizes resulted in increased peripheral deposition. DISCUSSION: These data contrast the commonly used 10% deposition fraction for all aerosols between 1.0 and 5.0 µm and indicate that lung deposition fraction in this range does change with particle size. When compared to historical data, the 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0 µm particles result in similar lung deposition fractions; however, the 0.5 µm lung deposition fraction is markedly different. This is probably caused by the current aerosols that were polydisperse to reflect current pharmaceutical aerosols, while the historical data were generated with monodisperse aerosols. CONCLUSION: The deposition patterns of aerosols between 0.5 and 5.0 µm showed an increase in both overall and peripheral deposition as the particle size decreased. The Onion Model allows a more complex analysis of regional deposition in preclinical models.
Authors: Yi-Bo Wang; Alan B Watts; Jay I Peters; Sha Liu; Ayesha Batra; Robert O Williams Journal: AAPS PharmSciTech Date: 2014-05-14 Impact factor: 3.246
Authors: Todd M Umstead; Eranda Kurundu Hewage; Margaret Mathewson; Sarah Beaudoin; Zissis C Chroneos; Ming Wang; E Scott Halstead Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Timothy M Brenza; Latrisha K Petersen; Yanjie Zhang; Lucas M Huntimer; Amanda E Ramer-Tait; Jesse M Hostetter; Michael J Wannemuehler; Balaji Narasimhan Journal: Pharm Res Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 4.200
Authors: B Asgharian; O T Price; M Oldham; Lung-Chi Chen; E L Saunders; T Gordon; V B Mikheev; K R Minard; J G Teeguarden Journal: Inhal Toxicol Date: 2014-11-06 Impact factor: 2.724
Authors: Nicholas B Carrigy; Sasha E Larsen; Valerie Reese; Tiffany Pecor; Melissa Harrison; Philip J Kuehl; Graham F Hatfull; Dominic Sauvageau; Susan L Baldwin; Warren H Finlay; Rhea N Coler; Reinhard Vehring Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2019-09-16 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: M D Reed; C S Tellez; M J Grimes; M A Picchi; M Tessema; Y S Cheng; T H March; P J Kuehl; S A Belinsky Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 7.640