ArticlePloS one2018
Integrin-targeted quantitative optoacoustic imaging with MRI correlation for monitoring a BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapy in a murine model of human melanoma.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate αvβ3-integrin-targeted optoacoustic imaging and MRI for monitoring a BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapy in a murine model of human melanoma. MATERIALS AND
methodsHuman BRAF V600E-positive melanoma xenograft (A375)-bearing Balb/c nude mice (n = 10) were imaged before (day 0) and after (day 7) a BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapy (encorafenib, 1.3 mg/kg/d; binimetinib, 0.6 mg/kg/d, n = 5) or placebo (n = 5), respectively. Optoacoustic imaging was performed on a preclinical system unenhanced and 5 h after i. v. injection of an αvβ3-integrin-targeted fluorescent probe. The αvβ3-integrin-specific tumor signal was derived by spectral unmixing. For morphology-based tumor response assessments, T2w MRI data sets were acquired on a clinical 3 Tesla scanner. The imaging results were validated by multiparametric immunohistochemistry (ß3 -integrin expression, CD31 -microvascular density, Ki-67 -proliferation).
resultsThe αvβ3-integrin-specific tumor signal was significantly reduced under therapy, showing a unidirectional decline in all animals (from 7.98±2.22 to 1.67±1.30; p = 0.043). No significant signal change was observed in the control group (from 6.60±6.51 to 3.67±1.93; p = 0.500). Immunohistochemistry revealed a significantly lower integrin expression (ß3: 0.20±0.02 vs. 0.39±0.05; p = 0.008) and microvascular density (CD31: 119±15 vs. 292±49; p = 0.008) in the therapy group. Tumor volumes increased with no significant intergroup difference (therapy: +107±42 mm3; control +112±44mm3, p = 0.841). In vivo blocking studies with αvβ3-integrin antagonist cilengitide confirmed the target specificity of the fluorescent probe.
conclusionsαvβ3-integrin-targeted optoacoustic imaging allowed for the early non-invasive monitoring of a BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapy in a murine model of human melanoma, adding molecular information on tumor receptor status to morphology-based tumor response criteria.
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.