Ultrasound Molecular Imaging of Acute Cellular Cardiac Allograft Rejection in Rat With T-Cell–Specific Nanobubbles

Background Acute rejection (AR) is one of the main obstacles of cardiac transplantation; however, a noninvasive diagnostic method, which reflects its pathologic nature, has not been developed yet. In this study, we prepared a specific nanobubbles targeting to the activated T cells and applied it in the ultrasound molecular imaging of AR in heart transplantation by myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE). Methods Nanobubbles loading anti-CD25 antibody (NBspecific) or isotype control antibody (NBnonspecific) were prepared and then applied in the ultrasound molecular imaging by MCE in a rat model. MCE was performed in 24 allografts and 18 isografts that were divided into three groups, including days 2, 4, and 6 after transplantation. Confocal laser scanning microscopy was used to evaluate the binding of nanobubbles and T cells in four allografts and four isografts. Results MCE with NBspecific in allograft showed a “delayed enhancement,” and the time-intensity curve presented a second peak. The intensity and time of second peak were both positively correlated with the transplant time (P<0.01) and the pathologic grade of AR (P<0.01). Confocal laser scanning microscopy demonstrated the binding of nanobubbles and lymphocytes in myocardium post-MCE with NBspecific. Conclusions Ultrasound molecular imaging of AR after heart transplantation can be achieved by using MCE with the nanobubbles targeted to T cells. The appearance of delayed enhancement indicates the occurrence of AR, and the intensity and time of the second peak in time-intensity curve provide potential quantitative indications for diagnosis and severity of AR.

[1]  P. Tipping,et al.  Cytokine Therapy With Interleukin-2/Anti–Interleukin-2 Monoclonal Antibody Complexes Expands CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Regulatory T Cells and Attenuates Development and Progression of Atherosclerosis , 2012, Circulation.

[2]  C. Labarrere,et al.  Biomarkers of heart transplant rejection: the good, the bad, and the ugly! , 2012, Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine.

[3]  Jiangnan Xu,et al.  Regulatory T cell migration during an immune response. , 2012, Trends in immunology.

[4]  Ping Wang,et al.  Nanobubbles for enhanced ultrasound imaging of tumors , 2012, International journal of nanomedicine.

[5]  C. Rihal,et al.  Current status of endomyocardial biopsy. , 2011, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[6]  Jesse V Jokerst,et al.  Molecular imaging with theranostic nanoparticles. , 2011, Accounts of chemical research.

[7]  J. Kobashigawa,et al.  Cardiac allograft rejection. , 2011, The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland.

[8]  Yunhua Gao,et al.  Effects of a novel ultrasound contrast agent with long persistence on right ventricular pressure: Comparison with SonoVue. , 2011, Ultrasonics.

[9]  Scott C. Brown,et al.  Nanoparticles as contrast agents for in-vivo bioimaging: current status and future perspectives , 2011, Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry.

[10]  J. Willmann,et al.  Molecular ultrasound assessment of tumor angiogenesis , 2010, Angiogenesis.

[11]  Wei Zheng,et al.  Antiangiogenic tumor treatment: noninvasive monitoring with contrast pulse sequence imaging for contrast-enhanced grayscale ultrasound. , 2010, Academic radiology.

[12]  Zhanwen Xing,et al.  The fabrication of novel nanobubble ultrasound contrast agent for potential tumor imaging , 2010, Nanotechnology.

[13]  Yunhua Gao,et al.  Construction of thrombus-targeted microbubbles carrying tissue plasminogen activator and their in vitro thrombolysis efficacy: a primary research , 2010, Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis.

[14]  M. Burch,et al.  Pre-implantation basiliximab reduces incidence of early acute rejection in pediatric heart transplantation. , 2009, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[15]  Jonathan R Lindner,et al.  Contrast ultrasound molecular imaging of inflammation in cardiovascular disease. , 2009, Cardiovascular research.

[16]  X. Hua,et al.  Effects of diagnostic contrast-enhanced ultrasound on permeability of placental barrier: a primary study. , 2009, Placenta.

[17]  S. Hunt,et al.  The changing face of heart transplantation. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  M. Weis,et al.  Cardiac allograft vasculopathy: recent developments. , 2008, Circulation.

[19]  W. Baldwin,et al.  Update on cardiac transplantation pathology. , 2007, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[20]  D. Mancini,et al.  Anti-CD25 treatment and FOXP3-positive regulatory T cells in heart transplantation. , 2007, Transplant immunology.

[21]  J. Delgado,et al.  Acute rejection after heart transplantation , 2006, Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy.

[22]  Silviu Itescu,et al.  Revision of the 1990 working formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart rejection. , 2005, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[23]  B. McManus,et al.  Progress in heart transplantation. , 2005, Cardiovascular pathology : the official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Pathology.

[24]  M. Kohno,et al.  Leukocyte-Targeted Myocardial Contrast Echocardiography Can Assess the Degree of Acute Allograft Rejection in a Rat Cardiac Transplantation Model , 2004, Circulation.

[25]  William R Wagner,et al.  Ultrasound Imaging of Acute Cardiac Transplant Rejection With Microbubbles Targeted to Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1 , 2003, Circulation.

[26]  Samuel A Wickline,et al.  Nanotechnology for molecular imaging and targeted therapy. , 2003, Circulation.

[27]  M. Hammond,et al.  A working formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart and lung rejection: Heart Rejection Study Group. The International Society for Heart Transplantation. , 1990, The Journal of heart transplantation.