| Literature DB >> 30105204 |
Ted G Xiao1, Jared A Weis1, F Scott Gayzik1, Alexandra Thomas2, Akiko Chiba3, Metin N Gurcan2, Umit Topaloglu4, Abhilash Samykutty4, Lacey R McNally1,4.
Abstract
Examining the dynamics of an agent in the tumor microenvironment can offer critical insights to the influx rate and accumulation of the agent. Intratumoral kinetic characterization in the in vivo setting can further elicudate distribution patterns and tumor microenvironment. Dynamic contrast-enhanced Multispectral Optoacoustic Tomographic imaging (DCE-MSOT) acquires serial MSOT images with the administration of an exogenous contrast agent over time. We tracked the dynamics of a tumor-targeted contrast agent, HypoxiSense 680 (HS680), in breast xenograft mouse models using MSOT. Arterial input function (AIF) approach with MSOT imaging allowed for tracking HS680 dynamics within the mouse. The optoacoustic signal for HS680 was quantified using the ROI function in the ViewMSOT software. A two-compartment pharmacokinetics (PK) model constructed in MATLAB to fit rate parameters. The contrast influx (kin) and outflux (kout) rate constants predicted are kin = 1.96 × 10-2 s-1 and kout = 9.5 × 10-3 s-1 (R = 0.9945).Entities:
Keywords: Hypoxia; Intratumoral kinetics; Multispectral optoacoustic imaging; Pharmacokinetic modeling; Targeted contrast agent; Tumor microenvironment
Year: 2018 PMID: 30105204 PMCID: PMC6086408 DOI: 10.1016/j.pacs.2018.07.003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Photoacoustics ISSN: 2213-5979
Fig. 1Spectral signatures for HS680. The absorbance, emission, and optoacoustic spectra were evaluated for HS680. (A) The absorbance and fluorescent emission of HS680 was determined using a spectrofluorometer. (B) The optoacoustic spectrum was determined by inserting HS680 into a tissue mimicking phantom and measured using MSOT. The optoacoustic spectrum was utilized to identify HS680 in vivo as detected using MSOT.
Fig. 2The pharmacokinetic model schematics. The basic structure of the PK model consists of two compartments: plasma compartment and tumor compartment. The two parameters, kin and kout, represent the rates at which a contrast agent fluxes in and out of the tumor compartment, respectively. Based on the pictorial schematic, the two-compartmental PK model assumes homogeneous distribution and constant volume in each compartment. Parameters are derived from curve-fitting the PK model curve to empirical MSOT data.
Fig. 3Quantification of MSOT signals using the region of interest (ROI) method. Cross-sectional images located near the center of the orthotopic breast tumor. (A) HS680 (B) Oxygenated hemoglobin (HBO2). The region of interest (ROI) function in the ViewMSOT software was used to quantify a contrast signal within an indicated region drawn. Orange represents optoacoustic signal in the tumor. Cyan represents signal within the AIF (aorta in this case). Green is a negative control outside of the animal model. The MSOT signal intensity of a fluorophore is quantified within the region and translated into a scatter plot (C and D). ROI signals are quantified based on the selected optoacoustic spectrum signature. The center of AIF and Ctumor ROIs are approximately the same distance (2.51 mm and 2.35 mm) from the surface of the mouse. Thus, this allows for the assumption of the same light fluence for both AIF and Ctumor in the mathematical derivation.
Fig. 4Evaluation of Hypoxisense680 (HS680) uptake within the breast tumor via Multispectral optoacoustic tomographic imaging. Tail-vein catheters were inserted within female mice implanted with breast tumors. Mice were allowed to equilibrate within the device for 5 min with accumulation of baseline images each 10 s prior to HS680 injection. As time progressed, HS680 accumulated within the tumor microenvironment (t = 10, 15, 20, 25 min) as demonstrated in the rainbow color bar. Oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO2) is shown in the corresponding images in red color scale. Combined HS680 and HbO2 images demonstrate relative location of both contrasts, which was overlaid onto a single channel 900 nm wavelength background image.
Fig. 5Constructing and implementing a parameter estimation algorithm for the PK model based on experimental MSOT data. The PK algorithm required two sets of data input and displayed in a scatter plot where (A) represents the AIF and (B) represents the experimental MSOT quantification data for HS680 in the tumor. The algorithm takes the AIF and experimental data in Eq. (6) and estimates the compartment model rate parameter values for the experimental data. (C) Once the optimal parameter values were determined, the PK model curve was overlaid on top of the experimental MSOT quantification data points. (D) The rate parameter values were charted in the table with R = 0.9945. The curve represents the best-fit curve of the 2-compartment PK model with the optimal rate parameters.