Imaging Nanoprobe for Prediction of Outcome of Nanoparticle Chemotherapy by Using Mammography

Purpose: To prospectively predict the effectiveness of a clinically used nanochemotherapeutic agent by detecting and measuring the intratumoral uptake of an x-ray contrast agent nanoprobe by using digital mammography.

Materials and Methods: All animal procedures were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee. A long-circulating 100-nm-scale injectable liposomal probe encapsulating 155 mg/mL iodine was developed. Preliminary studies were performed to identify the agent dose that would result in adequate tumor enhancement without enhancement of the normal vasculature in rats. This dose was used to image a rat breast tumor (n = 14) intermittently for 3 days by using a digital mammography system; subsequently, the animals were treated with liposomal doxorubicin. The predictive capability of the probe was characterized by creating good- and bad-prognosis subgroups, on the basis of tumor enhancement found during imaging, and analyzing the tumor growth after treatment of the animals in these two subgroups.

Results: A dose of 455 mg of iodine per kilogram of body weight was found to produce an undetectable signal from the blood while achieving enough intratumoral accumulation of the probe to produce adequate signal for detection. The good- and bad-prognosis subgroups demonstrated differential tumor growth rates (P < .003). An inverse linear relationship between the contrast enhancement rate constant during imaging and the tumor growth rate constant during treatment was found (slope = −0.576, R2 = 0.838).

Conclusion: In this animal model, quantitative measurement of vascular permeability enabled prediction of therapeutic responsiveness of tumors to liposomal doxorubicin.

© RSNA, 2009

References

  • 1 Ferrari M. Cancer nanotechnology: opportunities and challenges. Nat Rev Cancer 2005; 5(3): 161–171. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Service RF. Materials and biology: nanotechnology takes aim at cancer. Science 2005;310(5751):1132–1134. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Gradishar WJ, Tjulandin S, Davidson N, et al. Phase III trial of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel compared with polyethylated castor oil-based paclitaxel in women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(31):7794–7803. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lasic DD. Doxorubicin in sterically stabilized liposomes. Nature 1996;380(6574):561–562. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Yezhelyev MV, Gao X, Xing Y, Al-Hajj A, Nie S, O'Regan RM. Emerging use of nanoparticles in diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 2006;7(8):657–667. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lasic DD, Papahadjopoulos D. Liposomes revisited. Science 1995;267(5202):1275–1276. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 U.S. National Institutes of Health. ClinicalTrials.gov Web site. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Accessed December 12, 2007. Google Scholar
  • 8 Folkman J. Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med 1995;1(1):27–31. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Carmeliet P, Jain RK. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature 2000;407(6801):249–257. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Maeda H. SMANCS and polymer-conjugated macromolecular drugs: advantages in cancer chemotherapy. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2001;46(1–3):169–185. Google Scholar
  • 11 Maeda H, Wu J, Sawa T, Matsumura Y, Hori K. Tumor vascular permeability and the EPR effect in macromolecular therapeutics: a review. J Control Release 2000;65(1–2):271–284. Google Scholar
  • 12 Yuan F, Leunig M, Huang SK, Berk DA, Papahadjopoulos D, Jain RK. Microvascular permeability and interstitial penetration of sterically stabilized (stealth) liposomes in a human tumor xenograft. Cancer Res 1994;54(13):3352–3356. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Wolff AC. Liposomal anthracyclines and new treatment approaches for breast cancer. Oncologist 2003;8(suppl 2):25–30. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fukumura D, Jain RK. Tumor microenvironment abnormalities: causes, consequences, and strategies to normalize. J Cell Biochem 2007;101(4):937–949. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hobbs SK, Monsky WL, Yuan F, et al. Regulation of transport pathways in tumor vessels: role of tumor type and microenvironment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998;95(8):4607–4612. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Yuan F, Chen Y, Dellian M, Safabakhsh N, Ferrara N, Jain RK. Time-dependent vascular regression and permeability changes in established human tumor xenografts induced by an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor/vascular permeability factor antibody. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996;93(25):14765–14770. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Mukundan S Jr, Ghaghada KB, Badea CT, et al. A liposomal nanoscale contrast agent for preclinical CT in mice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186(2):300–307. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hubbell JH, Seltzer SM. Tables of x-ray mass attenuation coefficients and mass energy-absorption coefficients. http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/XrayMassCoef/cover.html. Accessed December 5, 2007. Google Scholar
  • 19 Ullman G, Sandborg M, Dance DR, Yaffe M, Alm Carlsson G. A search for optimal x-ray spectra in iodine contrast media mammography. Phys Med Biol 2005;50(13):3143–3152. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Flynn MJ, Samei E. Experimental comparison of noise and resolution for 2k and 4k storage phosphor radiography systems. Med Phys 1999;26(8):1612–1623. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Sechopoulos I, Suryanarayanan S, Vedantham S, D'Orsi C, Karellas A. Computation of the glandular radiation dose in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. Med Phys 2007;34(1):221–232. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Boone JM. Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for arbitrary X-ray spectra in mammography: computer-fit values of Monte Carlo derived data. Med Phys 2002;29(5):869–875. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23 McNeeley KM, Annapragada A, Bellamkonda RV. Decreased circulation time offsets increased efficacy of PEGylated nanocarriers targeting folate receptors of glioma. Nanotechnology 2007;18:385101. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Jain A, Kim YT, McKeon RJ, Bellamkonda RV. In situ gelling hydrogels for conformal repair of spinal cord defects, and local delivery of BDNF after spinal cord injury. Biomaterials 2006;27(3):497–504. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Brown BW, Atkinson EN, Bartoszynski R, Thompson JR, Montague ED. Estimation of human tumor growth rate from distribution of tumor size at detection. J Natl Cancer Inst 1984;72(1):31–38. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Park JW, Hong K, Kirpotin DB, et al. Anti-HER2 immunoliposomes: enhanced efficacy attributable to targeted delivery. Clin Cancer Res 2002;8(4):1172–1181. Google Scholar
  • 27 Kirpotin DB, Drummond DC, Shao Y, et al. Antibody targeting of long-circulating lipidic nanoparticles does not increase tumor localization but does increase internalization in animal models. Cancer Res 2006;66(13):6732–6740. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Saucier JM, Yu J, Gaikwad A, Coleman RL, Wolf JK, Smith JA. Determination of the optimal combination chemotherapy regimen for treatment of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in nude mouse model. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2007;13(1):39–45. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Drummond DC, Meyer O, Hong K, Kirpotin DB, Papahadjopoulos D. Optimizing liposomes for delivery of chemotherapeutic agents to solid tumors. Pharmacol Rev 1999;51(4):691–743. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Karathanasis E, Chan L, Balusu SR, et al. Multifunctional nanocarriers for mammographic quantification of tumor dosing and prognosis of breast cancer therapy. Biomaterials 2008;29:4815–4822. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Harrington KJ, Mohammadtaghi S, Uster PS, et al. Effective targeting of solid tumors in patients with locally advanced cancers by radiolabeled pegylated liposomes. Clin Cancer Res 2001;7(2):243–254. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Parish CR, Freeman C, Brown KJ, Francis DJ, Cowden WB. Identification of sulfated oligosaccharide-based inhibitors of tumor growth and metastasis using novel in vitro assays for angiogenesis and heparanase activity. Cancer Res 1999;59(14):3433–3441. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Huang SK, Lee KD, Hong K, Friend DS, Papahadjopoulos D. Microscopic localization of sterically stabilized liposomes in colon carcinoma-bearing mice. Cancer Res 1992;52(19):5135–5143. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Damert A, Machein M, Breier G, et al. Up-regulation of vascular endothelial growth factor expression in a rat glioma is conferred by two distinct hypoxia-driven mechanisms. Cancer Res 1997;57(17):3860–3864. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Takano S, Yoshii Y, Kondo S, et al. Concentration of vascular endothelial growth factor in the serum and tumor tissue of brain tumor patients. Cancer Res 1996;56(9):2185–2190. MedlineGoogle Scholar

Article History

Published in print: 2009