z-logo
Premium
MR Angiogenesis Imaging with Robo4‐ versus α V β 3 ‐ Targeted Nanoparticles in the B16/F10 Mouse Melanoma Model
Author(s) -
Boles Kent,
Schmieder Anne,
Caruthers Shelton,
Hu Grace,
Scott Michael,
Zhang Huiying,
Reynolds Benton,
Wickline Samuel,
Lanza Gregory
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.24.1_supplement.954.2
Subject(s) - angiogenesis , melanoma , cancer research , integrin , pathology , medicine , biology , receptor
The objectives of the present study were: 1) to compare noninvasive MR molecular imaging utilizing Robo4 and α ν β 3 –integrin as biosignatures of angiogenesis, 2) to determine the relative spatial distribution of Robo4 and α ν β 3 within tumor neovessels, and 3) to assess the prevalence of angiogenesis in a mouse model implanted with a rapidly growing, syngeneic tumor. B16‐F10 melanoma bearing mice were imaged with MR (3.0T) 11 days post implantation after intravenous administration of Robo4‐, α ν β 3 –, irrelevant‐, or non‐targeted paramagnetic nanoparticles. Neovascular signal enhancement was predominantly associated with the tumor periphery where it was greater for α ν β 3 –integrin than Robo4 (p<0.05). The mean MR contrast enhancement in the tumor cores did not differ from zero in the α ν β 3 –, irrelevant‐, and non‐targeted groups and was similarly low, but greater than zero (p<0.006) in the Robo4 animals. Microscopic examination of tumors co‐exposed to the Robo4 and α ν β 3 –targeted nanoparticles corroborated the MR angiogenesis mapping results and further revealed that Robo4 expression generally colocalized with α ν β 3 – integrin. These results suggest that α ν β 3 –integrin and Robo4 are useful biomarkers for noninvasive MR molecular imaging in syngeneic mouse tumors.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here