Cargando…

Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology

PURPOSE: There is an increasing need for small animal in vivo imaging in murine orthotopic glioma models. Because dedicated small animal scanners are not available ubiquitously, the applicability of a clinical CT scanner for visualization and measurement of intracerebrally growing glioma xenografts...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kirschner, Stefanie, Mürle, Bettina, Felix, Manuela, Arns, Anna, Groden, Christoph, Wenz, Frederik, Hug, Andreas, Glatting, Gerhard, Kramer, Martin, Giordano, Frank A., Brockmann, Marc A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5102379/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27829015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165994
_version_ 1782466417212260352
author Kirschner, Stefanie
Mürle, Bettina
Felix, Manuela
Arns, Anna
Groden, Christoph
Wenz, Frederik
Hug, Andreas
Glatting, Gerhard
Kramer, Martin
Giordano, Frank A.
Brockmann, Marc A.
author_facet Kirschner, Stefanie
Mürle, Bettina
Felix, Manuela
Arns, Anna
Groden, Christoph
Wenz, Frederik
Hug, Andreas
Glatting, Gerhard
Kramer, Martin
Giordano, Frank A.
Brockmann, Marc A.
author_sort Kirschner, Stefanie
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: There is an increasing need for small animal in vivo imaging in murine orthotopic glioma models. Because dedicated small animal scanners are not available ubiquitously, the applicability of a clinical CT scanner for visualization and measurement of intracerebrally growing glioma xenografts in living mice was validated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 2.5x10(6) U87MG cells were orthotopically implanted in NOD/SCID/ᵞc(-/-) mice (n = 9). Mice underwent contrast-enhanced (300 μl Iomeprol i.v.) imaging using a micro-CT (80 kV, 75 μAs, 360° rotation, 1,000 projections, scan time 33 s, resolution 40 x 40 x 53 μm) and a clinical CT scanner (4-row multislice detector; 120 kV, 150 mAs, slice thickness 0.5 mm, feed rotation 0.5 mm, resolution 98 x 98 x 500 μm). Mice were sacrificed and the brain was worked up histologically. In all modalities tumor volume was measured by two independent readers. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were measured from reconstructed CT-scans (0.5 mm slice thickness; n = 18). RESULTS: Tumor volumes (mean±SD mm(3)) were similar between both CT-modalities (micro-CT: 19.8±19.0, clinical CT: 19.8±18.8; Wilcoxon signed-rank test p = 0.813). Moreover, between reader analyses for each modality showed excellent agreement as demonstrated by correlation analysis (Spearman-Rho >0.9; p<0.01 for all correlations). Histologically measured tumor volumes (11.0±11.2) were significantly smaller due to shrinkage artifacts (p<0.05). CNR and SNR were 2.1±1.0 and 1.1±0.04 for micro-CT and 23.1±24.0 and 1.9±0.7 for the clinical CTscanner, respectively. CONCLUSION: Clinical CT scanners may reliably be used for in vivo imaging and volumetric analysis of brain tumor growth in mice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5102379
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51023792016-11-18 Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology Kirschner, Stefanie Mürle, Bettina Felix, Manuela Arns, Anna Groden, Christoph Wenz, Frederik Hug, Andreas Glatting, Gerhard Kramer, Martin Giordano, Frank A. Brockmann, Marc A. PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: There is an increasing need for small animal in vivo imaging in murine orthotopic glioma models. Because dedicated small animal scanners are not available ubiquitously, the applicability of a clinical CT scanner for visualization and measurement of intracerebrally growing glioma xenografts in living mice was validated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 2.5x10(6) U87MG cells were orthotopically implanted in NOD/SCID/ᵞc(-/-) mice (n = 9). Mice underwent contrast-enhanced (300 μl Iomeprol i.v.) imaging using a micro-CT (80 kV, 75 μAs, 360° rotation, 1,000 projections, scan time 33 s, resolution 40 x 40 x 53 μm) and a clinical CT scanner (4-row multislice detector; 120 kV, 150 mAs, slice thickness 0.5 mm, feed rotation 0.5 mm, resolution 98 x 98 x 500 μm). Mice were sacrificed and the brain was worked up histologically. In all modalities tumor volume was measured by two independent readers. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were measured from reconstructed CT-scans (0.5 mm slice thickness; n = 18). RESULTS: Tumor volumes (mean±SD mm(3)) were similar between both CT-modalities (micro-CT: 19.8±19.0, clinical CT: 19.8±18.8; Wilcoxon signed-rank test p = 0.813). Moreover, between reader analyses for each modality showed excellent agreement as demonstrated by correlation analysis (Spearman-Rho >0.9; p<0.01 for all correlations). Histologically measured tumor volumes (11.0±11.2) were significantly smaller due to shrinkage artifacts (p<0.05). CNR and SNR were 2.1±1.0 and 1.1±0.04 for micro-CT and 23.1±24.0 and 1.9±0.7 for the clinical CTscanner, respectively. CONCLUSION: Clinical CT scanners may reliably be used for in vivo imaging and volumetric analysis of brain tumor growth in mice. Public Library of Science 2016-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5102379/ /pubmed/27829015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165994 Text en © 2016 Kirschner et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kirschner, Stefanie
Mürle, Bettina
Felix, Manuela
Arns, Anna
Groden, Christoph
Wenz, Frederik
Hug, Andreas
Glatting, Gerhard
Kramer, Martin
Giordano, Frank A.
Brockmann, Marc A.
Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology
title Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology
title_full Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology
title_fullStr Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology
title_full_unstemmed Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology
title_short Imaging of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Xenografts in Mice Using a Clinical CT Scanner: Comparison with Micro-CT and Histology
title_sort imaging of orthotopic glioblastoma xenografts in mice using a clinical ct scanner: comparison with micro-ct and histology
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5102379/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27829015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165994
work_keys_str_mv AT kirschnerstefanie imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT murlebettina imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT felixmanuela imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT arnsanna imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT grodenchristoph imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT wenzfrederik imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT hugandreas imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT glattinggerhard imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT kramermartin imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT giordanofranka imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology
AT brockmannmarca imagingoforthotopicglioblastomaxenograftsinmiceusingaclinicalctscannercomparisonwithmicroctandhistology