INTRODUCTION: The clinical need for improved intraoperative tumor visualization has led to the development of targeted contrast agents for fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS). A key characteristic of these agents is their high tumor specificity, which could enable detection of residual lesions that would likely be missed by visual inspection. Here, we examine the utility of a promising somatostatin receptor subtype-2 (SSTR2)-targeted fluorescent agent for detecting residual disease in mouse xenografts using FGS and post-operative histopathological validation. METHODS: Mice (n=2) implanted with SSTR2 overexpressing tumors were injected with 2 nmol of the dual-labeled somatostatin analog, 67Ga-MMC(IR800)-TOC, and tumors were resected 48 h post-injection using traditional white light reflectance and palpation. Tumors underwent gamma counting and histopathology analysis. The wide-field FGS imaging platform (OnLume) was used to evaluate residual disease in situ under ambient light representative of an operating room. RESULTS: The tumor was resected with grossly negative margins using conventional inspection and palpation; however, additional in situ residual disease was found in the tumor cavity using FGS imaging. In situ fluorescent tumor contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were 3.0 and 5.2. Agent accumulation was 7.72 and 8.20 %ID/g in tumors and 0.27 and 0.20 %ID/g in muscle. Fluorescence pixel values and gamma counts were highly correlated (r = 0.95, P < 0.048). H&E and IHC staining confirmed cancer positivity and SSTR2-overexpression, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that the use of clinically relevant fluorescence imaging instrumentation enhances the evaluation of promising FGS agents for in situ visualization of residual disease.
INTRODUCTION: The clinical need for improved intraoperative tumor visualization has led to the development of targeted contrast agents for fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS). A key characteristic of these agents is their high tumor specificity, which could enable detection of residual lesions that would likely be missed by visual inspection. Here, we examine the utility of a promising somatostatin receptor subtype-2 (SSTR2)-targeted fluorescent agent for detecting residual disease in mouse xenografts using FGS and post-operative histopathological validation. METHODS: Mice (n=2) implanted with SSTR2 overexpressing tumors were injected with 2 nmol of the dual-labeled somatostatin analog, 67Ga-MMC(IR800)-TOC, and tumors were resected 48 h post-injection using traditional white light reflectance and palpation. Tumors underwent gamma counting and histopathology analysis. The wide-field FGS imaging platform (OnLume) was used to evaluate residual disease in situ under ambient light representative of an operating room. RESULTS: The tumor was resected with grossly negative margins using conventional inspection and palpation; however, additional in situ residual disease was found in the tumor cavity using FGS imaging. In situ fluorescent tumor contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were 3.0 and 5.2. Agent accumulation was 7.72 and 8.20 %ID/g in tumors and 0.27 and 0.20 %ID/g in muscle. Fluorescence pixel values and gamma counts were highly correlated (r = 0.95, P < 0.048). H&E and IHC staining confirmed cancer positivity and SSTR2-overexpression, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that the use of clinically relevant fluorescence imaging instrumentation enhances the evaluation of promising FGS agents for in situ visualization of residual disease.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer surgery; fluorescence system instrumentation; fluorescence-guided surgery; intraoperative imaging; residual disease; somatostatin receptor; targeted agent
Authors: Willemieke S Tummers; Jason M Warram; Kiranya E Tipirneni; John Fengler; Paula Jacobs; Lalitha Shankar; Lori Henderson; Betsy Ballard; T Joshua Pfefer; Brian W Pogue; Jamey P Weichert; Michael Bouvet; Jonathan Sorger; Christopher H Contag; John V Frangioni; Michael F Tweedle; James P Basilion; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Eben L Rosenthal Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: E C Dijkers; T H Oude Munnink; J G Kosterink; A H Brouwers; P L Jager; J R de Jong; G A van Dongen; C P Schröder; M N Lub-de Hooge; E G de Vries Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2010-03-31 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Henricus J M Handgraaf; Leonora S F Boogerd; Shirin Shahbazi Feshtali; Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta; Marieke Snel; Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Bert A Bonsing; J Sven D Mieog Journal: Pancreas Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: E P Krenning; W H Bakker; W A Breeman; J W Koper; P P Kooij; L Ausema; J S Lameris; J C Reubi; S W Lamberts Journal: Lancet Date: 1989-02-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Eben L Rosenthal; Jason M Warram; Esther de Boer; James P Basilion; Merrill A Biel; Matthew Bogyo; Michael Bouvet; Brian E Brigman; Yolonda L Colson; Steven R DeMeester; Geoffrey C Gurtner; Takeaki Ishizawa; Paula M Jacobs; Stijn Keereweer; Joseph C Liao; Quyen T Nguyen; James M Olson; Keith D Paulsen; Dwaine Rieves; Baran D Sumer; Michael F Tweedle; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Jamey P Weichert; Brian C Wilson; Michael R Zenn; Kurt R Zinn; Gooitzen M van Dam Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Rongzhi Wang; Rui Zheng-Pywell; H Alexander Chen; James A Bibb; Herbert Chen; J Bart Rose Journal: Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes Date: 2019-10-24
Authors: Ryan K Orosco; Viridiana J Tapia; Joseph A Califano; Bryan Clary; Ezra E W Cohen; Christopher Kane; Scott M Lippman; Karen Messer; Alfredo Molinolo; James D Murphy; John Pang; Assuntina Sacco; Kathryn R Tringale; Anne Wallace; Quyen T Nguyen Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-04-09 Impact factor: 4.379