4.5 Article

Identification of the optimal therapeutic antibody for fluorescent imaging of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

Journal

CANCER BIOLOGY & THERAPY
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages 271-277

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.4161/cbt.23300

Keywords

optical imaging; cancer; surgery; cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; antibody; animal model; fluorescence

Categories

Funding

  1. NIDCR [R21DE019232]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Intraoperative, real-time fluorescence imaging may significantly improve tumor visualization and resection and postoperatively, in pathological assessment. To this end, we sought to determine the optimal FDA approved therapeutic monoclonal antibody for optical imaging of human cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). A near-infrared (NIR) fluorescent probe (IRDye800) was covalently linked to bevacizumab, panitumumab or tocilizumab and injected systemically into immunodeficient mice bearing either cutaneous tumor cell lines (SCC13) or cutaneous human tumor explants. Tumors were then imaged and resected under fluorescent guidance with the SPY, an FDA-approved intraoperative imaging system, and the Pearl Impulse small animal imaging system. All fluorescently labeled antibodies delineated normal tissue from tumor in SCC13 xenografts based on tumor-to-background (TBR) ratios. The conjugated antibodies produced TBRs of 1.2-2 using SPY and 1.6-3.6 using Pearl; in comparison, isotype control antibody IgG-IRDye produced TBRs of 1.0 (SPY) and 0.98 (Pearl). Comparison between antibodies revealed them to be roughly equivalent for imaging purposes with both the SPY and Pearl (p = 0.89 SPY, p = 0.99 Pearl; one way ANOVA). Human tumor explants were also imaged and tumor detection was highest with panitumumab-IRDye800 when using the SPY (TBR 3.0) and Pearl (TBR 4.0). These data suggest that FDA approved antibodies may be clinically used for intraoperative detection of cSCC.

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