ArticlePloS one2018
Validation of near infrared fluorescence (NIRF) probes in vivo with dual laser NIRF endoscope.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Highlighting the Undetectable - Fluorescence Molecular Imaging in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Molecular imaging and biology · 2023Review
- Application of near-infrared fluorescence imaging in theranostics of gastrointestinal tumors.Gastroenterology report · 2023Review
- Fundamentals and developments in fluorescence-guided cancer surgery.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2022Review
- Molecular probes for selective detection of cysteine cathepsins.Organic & biomolecular chemistry · 2021Review
- Recent advances in activity-based probes (ABPs) and affinity-based probes (AChemical science · 2021Review
- Near-Infrared Fluorescent Endoscopic Image-Guided Photothermal Ablation Therapy of Colorectal Cancer Using Dual-Modal Gold Nanorods Targeting Tumor-Infiltrating Innate Immune Cells in a Transgenic TS4 CRE/APCACS applied materials & interfaces · 2019Article
- Correction: Validation of near infrared fluorescence (NIRF) probes in vivo with dual laser NIRF endoscope.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe development of NIRF cathepsin activity probes offered the ability to visualize tumor associated tumor reaction and act as a surrogate marker to delineate the dysplastic lesions. One major type is a NIRF substrate of cathepsins (SBP), which is involved in catalytic way to produce high levels of fluorescence emission. The other major type (ABP) reacts with active cathepsins in stoichiometric manner since they bind covalently with their active center. Little is known about the sensitivity and the specificity of the NIRF probes to detect autochthonous developed dysplastic lesions. Dual laser NIRF endoscope provides a good tool to determine the efficiency of various NIRF probes in vivo in the same lesions. EXPERIMENTAL
designIn the current study, we validated both types of NIRF probes by using the dual laser NIRF endoscope to detect lesions colon cancer mouse model (TS4Cre/cAPC +/lox).
resultsThe dual laser NIRF endoscope is emitting equal power with both lasers. It can detect with the same efficiency in 680 mode, as well as, 750 mode when NIFR probes of the same scaffold in vivo. When SBP and ABP were used, our results showed both probes are efficient enough to detect large polyps but small dysplastic lesions could not efficiently imaged with the ABP.
conclusionsThe dual laser NIRF endoscope is a powerful tool to validate probes. The probes that react catalytically with the active center of cathepsins are more efficient than the ones that react stoichiometrically in detecting small lesions.
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.