ArticleMolecular imaging and biology2026
In vivo Fluorescent Molecular Imaging Using Nanobodies Labeled with Next-Generation FNIR-Tag-Dyes.
Article in Molecular imaging and biology, 2026. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFluorescently labeled Nanobodies (Nbs) provide rapid, specific, and high-contrast molecular imaging capabilities, making them well-suited for applications such as fluorescence-guided surgery. As dye properties can substantially influence tracer performance, this study evaluated three next-generation FNIR-Tag dyes, each conjugated to an anti-EGFR Nb. PROCEDURES: The anti-EGFR Nb 7D12 was conjugated to FNIR-Tag-1.0, FNIR-Tag-766 or FNIR-Tag-804, and characterized in vitro. In vivo imaging and biodistribution studies were performed to assess pharmacokinetics, tumor uptake, tumor-to-background ratios, contrast-to-noise ratios, and renal clearance.
resultsAll three Nb-based tracers exhibited similar overall pharmacokinetic behavior, characterized by fast tumor accumulation, rapid clearance from blood and non-target tissues, and predominant renal elimination. 7D12-FNIR-Tag-1.0 demonstrated slightly higher tumor uptake, whereas 7D12-FNIR-Tag-766 produced marginally improved tumor-to-background and contrast-to-noise ratios. In contrast, 7D12-FNIR-Tag-804 yielded significantly lower tumor signal intensity, although its imaging contrast remained comparable due to proportionally reduced background fluorescence. Despite differences in dye net charge, no substantial variation in kidney retention was observed over 24 h. Microscopic analysis revealed, however, distinct renal handling: 7D12-FNIR-Tag-766 showed partial endosomal internalization within proximal tubule cells, while 7D12-FNIR-Tag-1.0 remained primarily luminal.
conclusionsFNIR-Tag-labeled Nbs enable effective tumor visualization at 1 h post-injection. Although overall biodistribution was comparable across dyes, differences in tissue uptake, intrinsic brightness, and compatibility with imaging system optics can influence detection sensitivity and should inform dye selection for clinical imaging applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42490000What 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.