Evaluation of Nanoparticle Uptake in Tumors in Real Time Using Intravital Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current technologies for tumor imaging, such as ultrasound, MRI, PET and CT, are unable to yield high-resolution images for the assessment of nanoparticle uptake in tumors at the microscopic level1,2,3, highlighting the utility of a suitable xenograft model in which to perform detailed uptake analyses. Here, we use high-resolution intravital imaging to evaluate nanoparticle uptake in human tumor xenografts in a modified, shell-less chicken embryo model. The chicken embryo model is particularly well-suited for these in vivo analyses because it supports the growth of human tumors, is relatively inexpensive and does not require anesthetization or surgery 4,5. Tumor cells form fully vascularized xenografts within 7 days when implanted into the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) 6. The resulting tumors are visualized by non-invasive real-time, high-resolution imaging that can be maintained for up to 72 hours with little impact on either the host or tumor systems. Nanoparticles with a wide range of sizes and formulations administered distal to the tumor can be visualized and quantified as they flow through the bloodstream, extravasate from leaky tumor vasculature, and accumulate at the tumor site. We describe here the analysis of nanoparticles derived from Cowpea mosaic virus (CPMV) decorated with near-infrared fluorescent dyes and/or polyethylene glycol polymers (PEG) 7, 8, 9,10,11. Upon intravenous administration, these viral nanoparticles are rapidly internalized by endothelial cells, resulting in global labeling of the vasculature both outside and within the tumor7,12. PEGylation of the viral nanoparticles increases their plasma half-life, extends their time in the circulation, and ultimately enhances their accumulation in tumors via the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect 7, 10,11. The rate and extent of accumulation of nanoparticles in a tumor is measured over time using image analysis software. This technique provides a method to both visualize and quantify nanoparticle dynamics in human tumors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".