ReviewPhysics in medicine and biology2015
Quantitative in vivo cell-surface receptor imaging in oncology: kinetic modeling and paired-agent principles from nuclear medicine and optical imaging.
Review in Physics in medicine and biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
54 citing papers in PubMed, 92 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metastatic and sentinel lymph node mapping using intravenously delivered Panitumumab-IRDye800CW.Theranostics · 2021Trial
- Click Chemistry Functionalization of Harmonic Nanoparticles with Lanthanide Complexes Towards Tunable Platforms for Multimodal Imaging.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- TRIPODD Enables Single-Cell Quantification of Therapeutic Efficacy.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- A multi-channel fluorescence endoscope for pre-operative assessment of epithelial ovarian cancer.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2026Article
- Deep learning-derived arterial input function for dynamic brain PET.NeuroImage · 2025Article
- Dual-channel pulse-dye densitometry can enable correction of fluorescent targeted and control agent plasma input function differences for quantitative paired-agent molecular imaging: a simulation study.Journal of biomedical optics · 2025Article
- Article
- Advances and challenges in immunoPET methodology.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2024Review
- Identification of a Suitable Untargeted Agent for the Clinical Translation of ABY-029 Paired-Agent Imaging in Fluorescence-Guided Surgery.Molecular imaging and biology · 2023Article
- Article
- Improved Discrimination of Tumors with Low and Heterogeneous EGFR Expression in Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Through Paired-Agent Protocols.Molecular imaging and biology · 2023Article
- Multispectral optoacoustic tomography forPhotoacoustics · 2022Article
- Smart imaging to empower brain-wide neuroscience at single-cell levels.Brain informatics · 2022Review
- Examining the Feasibility of Quantifying Receptor Availability Using Cross-Modality Paired-Agent Imaging.Molecular imaging and biology · 2022Article
- Comparison of cRGDfK Peptide Probes with Appended Shielded Heptamethine Cyanine Dye (ACS omega · 2021Article
- Evaluation of glial cell proliferation with non-invasive molecular imaging methods after stroke.Neural regeneration research · 2021Article
- Intraoperative Detection of Micrometastases in Whole Excised Lymph Nodes Using Fluorescent Paired-Agent Imaging Principles: Identification of a Suitable Staining and Rinsing Protocol.Molecular imaging and biology · 2021Article
- Optical Biosensors for Virus Detection: Prospects for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2021Review
- Biology-guided radiotherapy: redefining the role of radiotherapy in metastatic cancer.The British journal of radiology · 2021Review
- Prediction of optimal contrast times post-imaging agent administration to inform personalized fluorescence-guided surgery.Journal of biomedical optics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The development of methods to accurately quantify cell-surface receptors in living tissues would have a seminal impact in oncology. For example, accurate measures of receptor density in vivo could enhance early detection or surgical resection of tumors via protein-based contrast, allowing removal of cancer with high phenotype specificity. Alternatively, accurate receptor expression estimation could be used as a biomarker to guide patient-specific clinical oncology targeting of the same molecular pathway. Unfortunately, conventional molecular contrast-based imaging approaches are not well adapted to accurately estimating the nanomolar-level cell-surface receptor concentrations in tumors, as most images are dominated by nonspecific sources of contrast such as high vascular permeability and lymphatic inhibition. This article reviews approaches for overcoming these limitations based upon tracer kinetic modeling and the use of emerging protocols to estimate binding potential and the related receptor concentration. Methods such as using single time point imaging or a reference-tissue approach tend to have low accuracy in tumors, whereas paired-agent methods or advanced kinetic analyses are more promising to eliminate the dominance of interstitial space in the signals. Nuclear medicine and optical molecular imaging are the primary modalities used, as they have the nanomolar level sensitivity needed to quantify cell-surface receptor concentrations present in tissue, although each likely has a different clinical niche.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.