Elucidating the kinetics of sodium fluorescein for fluorescence-guided surgery of glioma.
BBB = blood-brain barrier
FGS = fluorescence-guided surgery
HED = human equivalent dose
NaFl = sodium fluorescein
PBS = phosphate-buffered saline
ROI = region of interest
blood-brain barrier
brain tumor
fluorescence-guided surgery
oncology
sodium fluorescein
surgical technique
Journal
Journal of neurosurgery
ISSN: 1933-0693
Titre abrégé: J Neurosurg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0253357
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 09 2019
01 09 2019
Historique:
received:
19
10
2017
accepted:
05
04
2018
pubmed:
8
9
2018
medline:
9
11
2019
entrez:
8
9
2018
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The use of the optical contrast agent sodium fluorescein (NaFl) to guide resection of gliomas has been under investigation for decades. Although this imaging strategy assumes the agent remains confined to the vasculature except in regions of blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption, clinical studies have reported significant NaFl signal in normal brain tissue, limiting tumor-to-normal contrast. A possible explanation arises from earlier studies, which reported that NaFl exists in both pure and protein-bound forms in the blood, the former being small enough to cross the BBB. This study aims to elucidate the kinetic binding behavior of NaFl in circulating blood and its effect on NaFl accumulation in brain tissue and tumor contrast. Additionally, the authors examined the blood and tissue kinetics, as well as tumor uptake, of a pegylated form of fluorescein selected as a potential optical analog of gadolinium-based MRI contrast agents. Cohorts of mice were administered one of the following doses/forms of NaFl: 1) high human equivalent dose (HED) of NaFl, 2) low HED of NaFl, or 3) pegylated form of fluorescein. In each cohort, groups of animals were euthanized 15, 30, 60, and 120 minutes after administration for ex vivo analysis of fluorescein fluorescence. Using gel electrophoresis and fluorescence imaging of blood and brain specimens, the authors quantified the temporal kinetics of bound NaFl, unbound NaFl, and pegylated fluorescein in the blood and normal brain tissue. Finally, they compared tumor-to-normal contrast for NaFl and pegylated-fluorescein in U251 glioma xenografts. Administration of NaFl resulted in the presence of unbound and protein-bound NaFl in the circulation, with unbound NaFl constituting up to 70% of the signal. While protein-bound NaFl was undetectable in brain tissue, unbound NaFl was observed throughout the brain. The observed behavior was time and dose dependent. The pegylated form of fluorescein showed minimal uptake in brain tissue and improved tumor-to-normal contrast by 38%. Unbound NaFl in the blood crosses the BBB, limiting the achievable tumor-to-normal contrast and undermining the inherent advantage of tumor imaging in the brain. Dosing and incubation time should be considered carefully for NaFl-based fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) of glioma. A pegylated form of fluorescein showed more favorable normal tissue kinetics that translated to higher tumor-to-normal contrast. These results warrant further development of pegylated-fluorescein for FGS of glioma.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30192200
pii: 2018.4.JNS172644
doi: 10.3171/2018.4.JNS172644
pmc: PMC6995036
mid: NIHMS1068740
doi:
pii:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Fluorescein
TPY09G7XIR
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
724-734Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01 CA184354
Pays : United States
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : R01 NS052274
Pays : United States
Références
J Biomed Opt. 2011 Sep;16(9):096008
pubmed: 21950922
N Engl J Med. 2017 May 4;376(18):e36
pubmed: 28467882
Front Oncol. 2015 Jul 30;5:175
pubmed: 26284196
J Neurooncol. 2004 Mar-Apr;67(1-2):47-52
pubmed: 15072447
Phys Med Biol. 2015 Jul 21;60(14):R239-69
pubmed: 26134619
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2013 Jul;155(7):1277-86
pubmed: 23661063
Exp Eye Res. 1978 Oct;27(4):417-25
pubmed: 729654
Minn Med. 1948 Oct;31(10):1073-6
pubmed: 18888792
Physiol Res. 2003;52(5):607-14
pubmed: 14535837
Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2017 Oct;28(4):569-583
pubmed: 28917285
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2015 Sep;157(8):1379-81
pubmed: 26088332
Neurosurg Rev. 2013 Apr;36(2):205-14; discussion 214
pubmed: 23187966
Mol Imaging Biol. 2017 Aug;19(4):512-521
pubmed: 27909986
Ind Eng Chem Res. 2017 May 24;56(20):5761-5777
pubmed: 28572701
Turk Neurosurg. 2016;26(2):185-94
pubmed: 26956810
Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2000 Apr;20(2):183-96
pubmed: 10696509
J Neurosurg. 2018 Feb;128(2):399-405
pubmed: 28338432
J Clin Pharmacol. 2011 May;51(5):672-8
pubmed: 20978277
Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Aug 15;21(16):3658-66
pubmed: 25904751
Surg Innov. 2018 Feb;25(1):62-68
pubmed: 29303061
Mol Imaging. 2009 Dec;8(6):303-4
pubmed: 20003888
Radiographics. 2014 May-Jun;34(3):702-21
pubmed: 24819790
Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Jun 1;23(11):2730-2741
pubmed: 28119364
Neurology. 1961 Dec;11:1081-5
pubmed: 13908102
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. 2016 Jan-Feb;8(1):46-60
pubmed: 26053199
Mol Imaging Biol. 2012 Oct;14(5):584-92
pubmed: 22203241
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010 Mar;31(5):548-52
pubmed: 20002025
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 05;8(7):e68595
pubmed: 23861924
Biomed Opt Express. 2016 Aug 09;7(9):3280-3288
pubmed: 27699098
Neurosurgery. 2009 Mar;64(3 Suppl):ons53-60; discussion ons60-1
pubmed: 19240573