Literature DB >> 35650411

Evaluating the Accuracy of FUCCI Cell Cycle In Vivo Fluorescent Imaging to Assess Tumor Proliferation in Preclinical Oncology Models.

Yun Lu1,2, Adriana V F Massicano1, Carlos A Gallegos3, Katherine A Heinzman3, Sean W Parish3, Jason M Warram4,5, Anna G Sorace6,7,8,9.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The primary goal of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of the fluorescence ubiquitination cell cycle indicator (FUCCI) system with fluorescence in vivo imaging compared to 3'-deoxy-3'-[18F]fluorothymidine ([18F]-FLT) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) and biological validation through histology. Imaging with [18F]-FLT PET/CT can be used to noninvasively assess cancer cell proliferation and has been utilized in both preclinical and clinical studies. However, a cost-effective and straightforward method for in vivo, cell cycle targeted cancer drug screening is needed prior to moving towards translational imaging methods such as PET/CT. PROCEDURES: In this study, fluorescent MDA-MB-231-FUCCI tumor growth was monitored weekly with caliper measurements and fluorescent imaging. Seven weeks post-injection, [18F]-FLT PET/CT was performed with a preclinical PET/CT, and tumors samples were harvested for histological analysis.
RESULTS: RFP fluorescent signal significantly correlated with tumor volume (r = 0.8153, p < 0.0001). Cell proliferation measured by GFP fluorescent imaging was correlated with tumor growth rate (r = 0.6497, p < 0.001). Also, GFP+ cells and [18F]-FLT regions of high uptake were both spatially located in the tumor borders, indicating that the FUCCI-IVIS method may provide an accurate assessment of tumor heterogeneity of cell proliferation. The quantification of total GFP signal was correlated with the sum of tumor [18F]-FLT standard uptake value (SUV) (r = 0.5361, p = 0.0724). Finally, histological analysis confirmed viable cells in the tumor and the correlation of GFP + and Ki67 + cells (r = 0.6368, p = 0.0477).
CONCLUSION: Fluorescent imaging of the cell cycle provides a noninvasive accurate depiction of tumor progression and response to therapy, which may benefit in vivo testing of novel cancer therapeutics that target the cell cycle.
© 2022. World Molecular Imaging Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Cell cycle; Drug screening; Molecular imaging; Proliferative cell imaging; TNBC; [18F]-FLT PET/CT

Year:  2022        PMID: 35650411     DOI: 10.1007/s11307-022-01739-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol        ISSN: 1536-1632            Impact factor:   3.488


  38 in total

1.  Safety and Relative Dose Intensity of Dose-dense Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide Followed by Dose-dense Paclitaxel.

Authors:  Meiko Nishimura; Takuma Onoe; Hideki Sakai; Minori Arase; Sayuri Watanabe; Misao Soyama; Kazuki Hashimoto; Mayuko Miki; Kaori Tane; Koichi Hirokaga; Shintaro Takao; Koji Matsumoto
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.480

2.  18F-FLT PET/CT imaging for early monitoring response to CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy in triple negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Guang Ma; Cheng Liu; Weiling Lian; Yongping Zhang; Huiyu Yuan; Yingjian Zhang; Shaoli Song; Zhongyi Yang
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 2.668

3.  Capivasertib Plus Paclitaxel Versus Placebo Plus Paclitaxel As First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: The PAKT Trial.

Authors:  Peter Schmid; Jacinta Abraham; Stephen Chan; Duncan Wheatley; Adrian Murray Brunt; Gia Nemsadze; Richard D Baird; Yeon Hee Park; Peter S Hall; Timothy Perren; Robert C Stein; László Mangel; Jean-Marc Ferrero; Melissa Phillips; John Conibear; Javier Cortes; Andrew Foxley; Elza C de Bruin; Robert McEwen; Daniel Stetson; Brian Dougherty; Shah-Jalal Sarker; Aaron Prendergast; Max McLaughlin-Callan; Matthew Burgess; Cheryl Lawrence; Hayley Cartwright; Kelly Mousa; Nicholas C Turner
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 4.  Use of FDG-PET to monitor response to chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with lymphomas.

Authors:  N George Mikhaeel
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 5.  Advances in Targeted Therapies for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Kelly E McCann; Sara A Hurvitz; Nicholas McAndrew
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 6.  Practical classification of triple-negative breast cancer: intratumoral heterogeneity, mechanisms of drug resistance, and novel therapies.

Authors:  Antonio Marra; Dario Trapani; Giulia Viale; Carmen Criscitiello; Giuseppe Curigliano
Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-10-16

Review 7.  Targeting cell cycle regulation in cancer therapy.

Authors:  Santiago Diaz-Moralli; Míriam Tarrado-Castellarnau; Anibal Miranda; Marta Cascante
Journal:  Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2013-01-26       Impact factor: 12.310

8.  Cell-Proliferation Imaging for Monitoring Response to CDK4/6 Inhibition Combined with Endocrine-Therapy in Breast Cancer: Comparison of [18F]FLT and [18F]ISO-1 PET/CT.

Authors:  Azadeh Elmi; Mehran Makvandi; Chi-Chang Weng; Catherine Hou; Amy S Clark; Robert H Mach; David A Mankoff
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 13.801

9.  Associations Between PET Parameters and Expression of Ki-67 in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Alexey Surov; Hans Jonas Meyer; Andreas Wienke
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 4.243

10.  Olaparib monotherapy as primary treatment in unselected triple negative breast cancer.

Authors:  H P Eikesdal; S Yndestad; A Elzawahry; A Llop-Guevara; B Gilje; E S Blix; H Espelid; S Lundgren; J Geisler; G Vagstad; A Venizelos; L Minsaas; B Leirvaag; E G Gudlaugsson; O K Vintermyr; H S Aase; T Aas; J Balmaña; V Serra; E A M Janssen; S Knappskog; P E Lønning
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 32.976

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.