Ramasawmy, R;
Johnson, SP;
Roberts, TA;
Stuckey, DJ;
David, AL;
Pedley, RB;
Lythgoe, MF;
... Walker-Samuel, S; + view all
(2016)
Monitoring the Growth of an Orthotopic Tumour Xenograft Model: Multi-Modal Imaging Assessment with Benchtop MRI (1T), High-Field MRI (9.4T), Ultrasound and Bioluminescence.
PLoS One
, 11
(5)
, Article e0156162. 10.1371/journal.pone.0156162.
Preview |
Text
Monitoring the Growth of an Orthotopic Tumour Xenograft Model: Multi-Modal Imaging Assessment with Benchtop MRI (1T), High-Field MRI (9.4T), Ultrasound and Bioluminescence.pdf - Published Version Download (2MB) | Preview |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research using orthotopic and transgenic models of cancer requires imaging methods to non-invasively quantify tumour burden. As the choice of appropriate imaging modality is wide-ranging, this study aimed to compare low-field (1T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a novel and relatively low-cost system, against established preclinical techniques: bioluminescence imaging (BLI), ultrasound imaging (US), and high-field (9.4T) MRI. METHODS: A model of colorectal metastasis to the liver was established in eight mice, which were imaged with each modality over four weeks post-implantation. Tumour burden was assessed from manually segmented regions. RESULTS: All four imaging systems provided sufficient contrast to detect tumours in all of the mice after two weeks. No significant difference was detected between tumour doubling times estimated by low-field MRI, ultrasound imaging or high-field MRI. A strong correlation was measured between high-field MRI estimates of tumour burden and all the other modalities (p < 0.001, Pearson). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that both low-field MRI and ultrasound imaging are accurate modalities for characterising the growth of preclinical tumour models.
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
