MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026723510 · doi:10.3791/4050

Computed Tomography-guided Time-domain Diffuse Fluorescence Tomography in Small Animals for Localization of Cancer Biomarkers

2012· article· en· W2026723510 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kenneth M. Tichauer, Robert W. Holt, Kimberley S. Samkoe, Fadi El-Ghussein, Jason R. Gunn, Michael Jermyn, Hamid Dehghani, Frédéric Leblond, Brian W. Pogue

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDiffuse optical imagingFluorescenceMaterials scienceFluorescence-lifetime imaging microscopyOpticsPhotomultiplierTomographyAbsorption (acoustics)Biomedical engineeringNear-infrared spectroscopyPreclinical imagingDetectorPhysicsIn vivoMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small animal fluorescence molecular imaging (FMI) can be a powerful tool for preclinical drug discovery and development studies. However, light absorption by tissue chromophores (e.g., hemoglobin, water, lipids, melanin) typically limits optical signal propagation through thicknesses larger than a few millimeters. Compared to other visible wavelengths, tissue absorption for red and near-infrared (near-IR) light absorption dramatically decreases and non-elastic scattering becomes the dominant light-tissue interaction mechanism. The relatively recent development of fluorescent agents that absorb and emit light in the near-IR range (600-1000 nm), has driven the development of imaging systems and light propagation models that can achieve whole body three-dimensional imaging in small animals. Despite great strides in this area, the ill-posed nature of diffuse fluorescence tomography remains a significant problem for the stability, contrast recovery and spatial resolution of image reconstruction techniques and the optimal approach to FMI in small animals has yet to be agreed on. The majority of research groups have invested in charge-coupled device (CCD)-based systems that provide abundant tissue-sampling but suboptimal sensitivity, while our group and a few others have pursued systems based on very high sensitivity detectors, that at this time allow dense tissue sampling to be achieved only at the cost of low imaging throughput. Here we demonstrate the methodology for applying single-photon detection technology in a fluorescence tomography system to localize a cancerous brain lesion in a mouse model. The fluorescence tomography (FT) system employed single photon counting using photomultiplier tubes (PMT) and information-rich time-domain light detection in a non-contact conformation. This provides a simultaneous collection of transmitted excitation and emission light, and includes automatic fluorescence excitation exposure control, laser referencing, and co-registration with a small animal computed tomography (microCT) system. A nude mouse model was used for imaging. The animal was inoculated orthotopically with a human glioma cell line (U251) in the left cerebral hemisphere and imaged 2 weeks later. The tumor was made to fluoresce by injecting a fluorescent tracer, IRDye 800CW-EGF (LI-COR Biosciences, Lincoln, NE) targeted to epidermal growth factor receptor, a cell membrane protein known to be overexpressed in the U251 tumor line and many other cancers. A second, untargeted fluorescent tracer, Alexa Fluor 647 (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY) was also injected to account for non-receptor mediated effects on the uptake of the targeted tracers to provide a means of quantifying tracer binding and receptor availability/density. A CT-guided, time-domain algorithm was used to reconstruct the location of both fluorescent tracers (i.e., the location of the tumor) in the mouse brain and their ability to localize the tumor was verified by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Though demonstrated for fluorescence imaging in a glioma mouse model, the methodology presented in this video can be extended to different tumor models in various small animal models potentially up to the size of a rat.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.398 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207