z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology
Author(s) -
Stefanie Kirschner,
Bettina Mürle,
Manuela C. Felix,
Anna Arns,
Christoph Groden,
Frederik Wenz,
Andreas Hug,
Gerhard Glatting,
Martin Kramer,
Frank A. Giordano,
Marc A. Brockmann
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0165994
Subject(s) - glioblastoma , histology , scanner , nuclear medicine , medicine , pathology , radiology , cancer research , computer science , artificial intelligence
Purpose There is an increasing need for small animal in vivo imaging in murine orthotopic glioma models. Because dedicated small animal scanners are not available ubiquitously, the applicability of a clinical CT scanner for visualization and measurement of intracerebrally growing glioma xenografts in living mice was validated. Materials and Methods 2.5x10 6 U87MG cells were orthotopically implanted in NOD/SCID/ᵞc -/- mice (n = 9). Mice underwent contrast-enhanced (300 μl Iomeprol i.v.) imaging using a micro-CT (80 kV, 75 μAs, 360° rotation, 1,000 projections, scan time 33 s, resolution 40 x 40 x 53 μm) and a clinical CT scanner (4-row multislice detector; 120 kV, 150 mAs, slice thickness 0.5 mm, feed rotation 0.5 mm, resolution 98 x 98 x 500 μm). Mice were sacrificed and the brain was worked up histologically. In all modalities tumor volume was measured by two independent readers. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were measured from reconstructed CT-scans (0.5 mm slice thickness; n = 18). Results Tumor volumes (mean±SD mm 3 ) were similar between both CT-modalities (micro-CT: 19.8±19.0, clinical CT: 19.8±18.8; Wilcoxon signed-rank test p = 0.813). Moreover, between reader analyses for each modality showed excellent agreement as demonstrated by correlation analysis (Spearman-Rho >0.9; p<0.01 for all correlations). Histologically measured tumor volumes (11.0±11.2) were significantly smaller due to shrinkage artifacts (p<0.05). CNR and SNR were 2.1±1.0 and 1.1±0.04 for micro-CT and 23.1±24.0 and 1.9±0.7 for the clinical CTscanner, respectively. Conclusion Clinical CT scanners may reliably be used for in vivo imaging and volumetric analysis of brain tumor growth in mice.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here