Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35442536›Full record

ArticlePhotochemistry and photobiology2022

Quantifying the Photochemical Damage Potential of Contrast-Enhanced Fluorescence Imaging Products: Singlet Oxygen Production.

Brandon Gaitan, Lucas Frankle, Shruti Vig, Ellen Oskoui, Miriam Adwan, Yu Chen, Rosalie Elespuru, Huang-Chiao Huang, T Joshua Pfefer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Photochemistry and photobiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Brandon GaitanFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Lucas FrankleFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Shruti VigFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.ORCID 0000-0002-0534-1571
Ellen OskouiFood and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Silver Spring, MD.ORCID 0000-0002-2835-5431
Miriam AdwanFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Yu ChenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, Amherst, MA.
Rosalie ElespuruFood and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Silver Spring, MD.
Huang-Chiao Huang *Fischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.ORCID 0000-0002-5406-0733
T Joshua Pfefer *Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Silver Spring, MD.ORCID 0000-0002-9063-8387

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The benefits of contrast-enhancing imaging probes have become apparent over the past decade. However, there is a gap in the literature when it comes to the assessment of the phototoxic potential of imaging probes and systems emitting visible and/or near-infrared radiation. The primary mechanism of fluorescent agent phototoxicity is thought to involve the production of reactive molecular species (RMS), yet little has been published on the best practices for safety evaluation of RMS production levels for clinical products. We have proposed methods involving a cell-free assay to quantify singlet oxygen [(SO) a known RMS] generation of imaging probes, and performed testing of Indocyanine Green (ICG), Proflavine, Methylene Blue, IR700 and IR800 at clinically relevant concentrations and radiant exposures. Results indicated that SO production from IR800 and ICG were more than two orders of magnitude below that of the known SO generator Rose Bengal. Methylene Blue and IR700 produced much higher SO levels than ICG and IR800. These results were in good agreement with data from the literature. While agents that exhibit spectral overlap with the assay may be more prone to errors, our tests for one of these agents (Proflavine) appeared robust. Overall, our results indicate that this methodology shows promise for assessing the phototoxic potential of fluorophores due to SO production.

Indexed as

Methylene BlueSinglet OxygenIndocyanine GreenOptical ImagingProflavineIndocyanine GreenMethylene BlueProflavineSinglet Oxygen

Identifiers

PMID35442536
PMCPMC9540578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.