| Literature DB >> 24103079 |
Kai-Wen Huang1, Jen-Jie Chieh, In-Tsang Lin, Herng-Er Horng, Hong-Chang Yang, Chin-Yih Hong.
Abstract
Although the biomarker carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is expressed in colorectal tumors, the utility of an anti-CEA-functionalized image medium is powerful for in vivo positioning of colorectal tumors. With a risk of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONPs) that is lower for animals than other material carriers, anti-CEA-functionalized SPIONPs were synthesized in this study for labeling colorectal tumors by conducting different preoperatively and intraoperatively in vivo examinations. In magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the image variation of colorectal tumors reached the maximum at approximately 24 h. However, because MRI requires a nonmetal environment, it was limited to preoperative imaging. With the potentiality of in vivo screening and intraoperative positioning during surgery, the scanning superconducting-quantum-interference-device biosusceptometry (SSB) was adopted, showing the favorable agreement of time-varied intensity with MRI. Furthermore, biological methodologies of different tissue staining methods and inductively coupled plasma (ICP) yielded consistent results, proving that the obtained in vivo results occurred because of targeted anti-CEA SPIONPs. This indicates that developed anti-CEA SPIONPs owe the utilities as an image medium of these in vivo methodologies.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24103079 PMCID: PMC3852279 DOI: 10.1186/1556-276X-8-413
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Figure 1Characterization of anti-CEA MFs. (a) The structural scheme of anti-CEA MFs. (b) Magnetization properties of anti-CEA MFs. (c) The PXRD pattern of the crystalline SPIONPs. (d) Distribution of the hydrodynamic diameter of SPIONPs.
Figure 2SSB examination. (a) The schemes of SSB and its examination of a mouse with a colorectal tumor on its back. (b) The scanning curves at maximum intensity.
Figure 3Comparison between ΔArea/Areaby SSB and by MRI for mouse 1 and mouse 2.
Figure 4MRI examination. (a) MR images of mouse 1 and mouse 2 at various examination times. (b) The analytical comparison between the image intensities of the entire and upper tumor regions. The figure inset shows the time variations of different image intensities of mouse 1 and mouse 2, analyzed in the entire and upper tumor regions.
Figure 5Biological results of the tumors of mouse 3, mouse 4, and mouse 5. (a) Tissue staining methods of HE staining, PB staining, anti-CEA staining, and CD 31 staining. (b) Iron amount by ICP. The circles are data points obtained from the measured results of two tissues.