BACKGROUND: Treatment of soft tissue sarcoma (STS) includes complete tumor excision. However, in some patients, residual sarcoma cells remain in the tumor bed. We previously described a novel hand-held imaging device prototype that uses molecular imaging to detect microscopic residual cancer in mice during surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: To test this device in a clinical trial of dogs with naturally occurring sarcomas, we asked: (1) Are any adverse clinical or laboratory effects observed after intravenous administration of the fluorescent probes? (2) Do canine sarcomas exhibit fluorescence after administration of the cathepsin-activated probe? (3) Is the tumor-to-background ratio sufficient to distinguish tumor from tumor bed? And (4) can residual fluorescence be detected in the tumor bed during surgery and does this correlate with a positive margin? METHODS: We studied nine dogs undergoing treatment for 10 STS or mast cell tumors. Dogs received an intravenous injection of VM249, a fluorescent probe that becomes optically active in the presence of cathepsin proteases. After injection, tumors were removed by wide resection. The tumor bed was imaged using the novel imaging device to search for residual fluorescence. We determined correlations between tissue fluorescence and histopathology, cathepsin protease expression, and development of recurrent disease. Minimum followup was 9 months (mean, 12 months; range, 9-15 months). RESULTS: Fluorescence was apparent from all 10 tumors and ranged from 3 × 10(7) to 1 × 10(9) counts/millisecond/cm(2). During intraoperative imaging, normal skeletal muscle showed no residual fluorescence. Histopathologic assessment of surgical margins correlated with intraoperative imaging in nine of 10 cases; in the other case, there was no residual fluorescence, but tumor was found at the margin on histologic examination. No animals had recurrent disease at 9 to 15 months. CONCLUSIONS: These initial findings suggest this imaging system might be useful to intraoperatively detect residual tumor after wide resections. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The ability to assess the tumor bed intraoperatively for residual disease has the potential to improve local control.
BACKGROUND: Treatment of soft tissue sarcoma (STS) includes complete tumor excision. However, in some patients, residual sarcoma cells remain in the tumor bed. We previously described a novel hand-held imaging device prototype that uses molecular imaging to detect microscopic residual cancer in mice during surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: To test this device in a clinical trial of dogs with naturally occurring sarcomas, we asked: (1) Are any adverse clinical or laboratory effects observed after intravenous administration of the fluorescent probes? (2) Do caninesarcomas exhibit fluorescence after administration of the cathepsin-activated probe? (3) Is the tumor-to-background ratio sufficient to distinguish tumor from tumor bed? And (4) can residual fluorescence be detected in the tumor bed during surgery and does this correlate with a positive margin? METHODS: We studied nine dogs undergoing treatment for 10 STS or mast cell tumors. Dogs received an intravenous injection of VM249, a fluorescent probe that becomes optically active in the presence of cathepsin proteases. After injection, tumors were removed by wide resection. The tumor bed was imaged using the novel imaging device to search for residual fluorescence. We determined correlations between tissue fluorescence and histopathology, cathepsin protease expression, and development of recurrent disease. Minimum followup was 9 months (mean, 12 months; range, 9-15 months). RESULTS: Fluorescence was apparent from all 10 tumors and ranged from 3 × 10(7) to 1 × 10(9) counts/millisecond/cm(2). During intraoperative imaging, normal skeletal muscle showed no residual fluorescence. Histopathologic assessment of surgical margins correlated with intraoperative imaging in nine of 10 cases; in the other case, there was no residual fluorescence, but tumor was found at the margin on histologic examination. No animals had recurrent disease at 9 to 15 months. CONCLUSIONS: These initial findings suggest this imaging system might be useful to intraoperatively detect residual tumor after wide resections. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The ability to assess the tumor bed intraoperatively for residual disease has the potential to improve local control.
Authors: David G Kirsch; Daniela M Dinulescu; John B Miller; Jan Grimm; Philip M Santiago; Nathan P Young; G Petur Nielsen; Bradley J Quade; Christopher J Chaber; Christian P Schultz; Osamu Takeuchi; Roderick T Bronson; Denise Crowley; Stanley J Korsmeyer; Sam S Yoon; Francis J Hornicek; Ralph Weissleder; Tyler Jacks Journal: Nat Med Date: 2007-08-05 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Aaron Sabolch; Mary Feng; Kent Griffith; Callie Rzasa; Laura Gadzala; Felix Feng; Janet Sybil Biermann; Rashmi Chugh; Michael Ray; Edgar Ben-Josef Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Jordi Barretina; Barry S Taylor; Shantanu Banerji; Alexis H Ramos; Mariana Lagos-Quintana; Penelope L Decarolis; Kinjal Shah; Nicholas D Socci; Barbara A Weir; Alan Ho; Derek Y Chiang; Boris Reva; Craig H Mermel; Gad Getz; Yevgenyi Antipin; Rameen Beroukhim; John E Major; Charles Hatton; Richard Nicoletti; Megan Hanna; Ted Sharpe; Tim J Fennell; Kristian Cibulskis; Robert C Onofrio; Tsuyoshi Saito; Neerav Shukla; Christopher Lau; Sven Nelander; Serena J Silver; Carrie Sougnez; Agnes Viale; Wendy Winckler; Robert G Maki; Levi A Garraway; Alex Lash; Heidi Greulich; David E Root; William R Sellers; Gary K Schwartz; Cristina R Antonescu; Eric S Lander; Harold E Varmus; Marc Ladanyi; Chris Sander; Matthew Meyerson; Samuel Singer Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2010-07-04 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Jeffrey K Mito; Jorge M Ferrer; Brian E Brigman; Chang-Lung Lee; Rebecca D Dodd; William C Eward; Lisa F Marshall; Kyle C Cuneo; Jessica E Carter; Shalini Ramasunder; Yongbaek Kim; W David Lee; Linda G Griffith; Moungi G Bawendi; David G Kirsch Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-03-21 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jeffrey K Mito; Richard F Riedel; Leslie Dodd; Guy Lahat; Alexander J Lazar; Rebecca D Dodd; Lars Stangenberg; William C Eward; Francis J Hornicek; Sam S Yoon; Brian E Brigman; Tyler Jacks; Dina Lev; Sayan Mukherjee; David G Kirsch Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-11-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Laura E Selmic; Jonathan Samuelson; Jennifer K Reagan; Kelly J Mesa; Elizabeth Driskell; Joanne Li; Marina Marjanovic; Stephen A Boppart Journal: Vet Comp Oncol Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 2.613
Authors: Jenna L Mueller; Henry L Fu; Jeffrey K Mito; Melodi J Whitley; Rhea Chitalia; Alaattin Erkanli; Leslie Dodd; Diana M Cardona; Joseph Geradts; Rebecca M Willett; David G Kirsch; Nimmi Ramanujam Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: John Q Nguyen; Zain S Gowani; Maggie O'Connor; Isaac J Pence; The-Quyen Nguyen; Ginger E Holt; Herbert S Schwartz; Jennifer L Halpern; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen Journal: Lasers Surg Med Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 4.025
Authors: Kyle C Cuneo; Jeffrey K Mito; Melodi P Javid; Jorge M Ferrer; Yongbaek Kim; W David Lee; Moungi G Bawendi; Brian E Brigman; David G Kirsch Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2013-02-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Suzanne Bartholf DeWitt; William C Eward; Cindy A Eward; Alexander L Lazarides; Melodi Javid Whitley; Jorge M Ferrer; Brian E Brigman; David G Kirsch; John Berg Journal: Vet Surg Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 1.495
Authors: Alexander L Lazarides; Melodi J Whitley; David B Strasfeld; Diana M Cardona; Jorge M Ferrer; Jenna L Mueller; Henry L Fu; Suzanne Bartholf DeWitt; Brian E Brigman; Nimmi Ramanujam; David G Kirsch; William C Eward Journal: Theranostics Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 11.556