Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of MDA-MB-231 triple-negative breast cancer with 125I-labeled pHLIP (Var7) by single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) imaging. Methods: The binding fraction of [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) and MDA-MB-231 cells was measured at pH 7.4 and pH 6.0, and tumor-bearing mice were subjected to small-animal SPECT/CT imaging studies. Results: At pH = 6.0, the binding fractions of [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) and MDA-MB-231 cells at 10 min, 40 min, 1 h, and 2 h were 1.9 ± 0.1%, 3.5 ± 0.1%, 6.3 ± 0.8%, and 6.6 ± 0.3%, respectively. At pH = 7.4, there was no measured binding between [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) and MDA-MB-231 cells. Small-animal SPECT/CT imaging showed clearly visible tumors at 1 and 2 h after injection. Conclusions: [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) could bind to MDA-MB-231 cells in an acidic environment, and small-animal SPECT/CT imaging showed clear tumors at 1 and 2 h after probe injection.
Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of MDA-MB-231 triple-negative breast cancer with 125I-labeled pHLIP (Var7) by single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) imaging. Methods: The binding fraction of [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) and MDA-MB-231 cells was measured at pH 7.4 and pH 6.0, and tumor-bearing mice were subjected to small-animal SPECT/CT imaging studies. Results: At pH = 6.0, the binding fractions of [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) and MDA-MB-231 cells at 10 min, 40 min, 1 h, and 2 h were 1.9 ± 0.1%, 3.5 ± 0.1%, 6.3 ± 0.8%, and 6.6 ± 0.3%, respectively. At pH = 7.4, there was no measured binding between [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) and MDA-MB-231 cells. Small-animal SPECT/CT imaging showed clearly visible tumors at 1 and 2 h after injection. Conclusions: [125I]I-pHLIP (Var7) could bind to MDA-MB-231 cells in an acidic environment, and small-animal SPECT/CT imaging showed clear tumors at 1 and 2 h after probe injection.
Authors: Ming An; Dayanjali Wijesinghe; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak; Donald M Engelman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-11-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Lan Yao; Jennifer Daniels; Dayanjali Wijesinghe; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak Journal: J Control Release Date: 2013-02-15 Impact factor: 9.776
Authors: Sven Macholl; Matthew S Morrison; Peter Iveson; Bente E Arbo; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak; Donald M Engelman; Edvin Johannesen Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Amy L Vāvere; Gráinne B Biddlecombe; William M Spees; Joel R Garbow; Dayanjali Wijesinghe; Oleg A Andreev; Donald M Engelman; Yana K Reshetnyak; Jason S Lewis Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Thomas T Tapmeier; Anna Moshnikova; John Beech; Danny Allen; Paul Kinchesh; Sean Smart; Adrian Harris; Alan McIntyre; Donald M Engelman; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak; Ruth J Muschel Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-07-20 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Alexander G Karabadzhak; Ming An; Lan Yao; Rachel Langenbacher; Anna Moshnikova; Ramona-Cosmina Adochite; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak; Donald M Engelman Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2014-09-10 Impact factor: 5.100