4.5 Article

MRI to detect atherosclerosis with gadolinium-containing immunomicelles targeting the macrophage scavenger receptor

Journal

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
Volume 56, Issue 3, Pages 601-610

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20995

Keywords

targeted contrast agent; MRI; atherosclerosis; macrophage; micelles

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [1 R24 CA095823-01] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [R01 HL071021, HL078667] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The ability to specifically image macrophages may enable improved detection and characterization of atherosclerosis. In this study we evaluated the in vitro uptake of gadolinium (Gd)-containing immunomicelles (micelles linked to macrophage-specific antibody), micelles, and standard contrast agents by murine macrophages, and sought to determine whether immunomicelles and micelles improve ex vivo imaging of apolipoprotein E knockout (ApoE KO) murine atherosclerosis. Murine RAW 264.7 macrophages were incubated with Gd-DTPA, micelles, and immunomicelles. Cell pellets were prepared and imaged using a 1.5 T MR system with an inversion recovery spin-echo sequence to determine the in vitro T-1 values. Ex vivo analysis of mouse aortas was performed using a 9.4T MR system with a high-spatial-resolution sequence (78 x 39 x 78 mu m(3)). The T-1 value was significantly decreased in cells treated with micelles compared to Gd-DTPA (P < 0.0001), and in cells incubated at VC with immunomicelles compared to micelles (P < 0.05). Ex vivo MRI signal intensity (SI) was significantly increased by 81% and 20% in aortas incubated with immunomicelles and micelles, respectively. Confocal microscopy demonstrated in vitro and ex vivo uptake of fluorescent immunomicelles by macrophages. Immunomicelles and micelles improve in vitro and ex vivo MR detection of macrophages, and may prove useful in the detection of macrophage-rich plaques.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available