2012
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.111.099754
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ultrasound Microbubbles for Molecular Diagnosis, Therapy, and Theranostics

Abstract: Ultrasound imaging is clinically established for routine screening examinations of breast, abdomen, neck, and other soft tissues, as well as for therapy monitoring. Microbubbles as vascular contrast agents improve the detection and characterization of cancerous lesions, inflammatory processes, and cardiovascular pathologies. Taking advantage of the excellent sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for microbubble detection, molecular imaging can be realized by binding antibodies, peptides, and other targetin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
219
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 270 publications
(220 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
219
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Over the years, it has undergone significant development from an initial proof of concept to a localized membrane perforation technique with spatio-temporal control [3], and it has achieved early success in facilitating drug delivery [4], gene therapy [5], intracellular biomarker extraction [6] and cancer treatment [7]. In fostering localized induction of sonoporation, one technical advance that has played an important role is the advent of targeted microbubbles with binding affinity to antigen receptors on the cell type of interest [8,9], such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors expressed on cancerous cells [10] or hypoxic endothelial cells [11]. These targeted microbubbles, often composed of a perfluorocarbon gas core encapsulated within an antibody-conjugated shell material [12], are in effect artificial gas bodies that would cavitate in response to ultrasound excitation, which could be as short as a single pulse firing [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over the years, it has undergone significant development from an initial proof of concept to a localized membrane perforation technique with spatio-temporal control [3], and it has achieved early success in facilitating drug delivery [4], gene therapy [5], intracellular biomarker extraction [6] and cancer treatment [7]. In fostering localized induction of sonoporation, one technical advance that has played an important role is the advent of targeted microbubbles with binding affinity to antigen receptors on the cell type of interest [8,9], such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors expressed on cancerous cells [10] or hypoxic endothelial cells [11]. These targeted microbubbles, often composed of a perfluorocarbon gas core encapsulated within an antibody-conjugated shell material [12], are in effect artificial gas bodies that would cavitate in response to ultrasound excitation, which could be as short as a single pulse firing [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The principles of this model may also be adapted to enable quantitative analysis in other imaging methods that suffer from multiple scattering and interference effects, most notably ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound. 23,24 We would like to acknowledge the funding from the following sources: the United States Air Force (FA9550-15-1-0007), the National Institutes of Health (NIH DP50D012179), the National Science Foundation (NSF 1438340), the Damon Runyon Cancer Research Center (DFS# 06-13), the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation (SAB15-00003), the Mary Kay Foundation (017-14), the Donald E. and Delia B. Baxter Foundation, a seed grant from the Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence and Translation (CCNE-T U54CA151459), and a Stanford Bio-X Interdisciplinary Initiative Seed Grant for GNR characterization. Additional thanks to the Cell Sciences Imaging Facility (CSIF), the Stanford Nano Center (SNF), and the Stanford Nanocharacterization Lab (SNL) for access to instruments for GNR characterization.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clinically, however, due to the abovementioned large inter-and intraindividual variability in EPR, the efficacy of passively tumor-targeted nanomedicines is compromised, with often significant improvements in tolerability, but hardly any increases in efficacy [9,10,14]. Consequently, there seems to be a clear need to develop methods to visualize and characterize the EPR effect, in order to preselect patients presenting with sufficiently high levels of EPR, to thereby (pre-) stratify responders and non-responders, and to thereby individualize and improve nano-chemotherapeutic treatments.We here used ~70 kDa-sized near-infrared fluorophore (NIRF) -labeled HPMA copolymers (which are known to efficiently accumulate in subcutaneous CT26 tumors in mice via EPR [29]), hybrid computed tomography-fluorescence molecular tomography (CT-FMT; [30][31][32]) and microbubble (MB) -based contrast-enhanced functional ultrasound (ceUS) imaging [33,34], to demonstrate that the degree of tumor vascularization correlates with the degree of EPR-mediated passive drug targeting. These findings indicate that relatively easily imageable vascular parameters, such as tumor blood volume and tumor blood flow, can be used to characterize EPR, and to on the basis of this preselect patients likely to respond to passively tumor-targeted nanomedicine therapies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%