Multiplexing with multispectral imaging: from mice to microscopy.

Increasing sophistication in the design and application of biological models as well as the advent of novel fluorescent probes have led to new demands on molecular imaging systems to deliver enhanced sensitivity, reliable quantitation, and the ability to resolve multiple simultaneous signals. Sensitivity is limited, especially in the visible spectral range, by the presence of ubiquitous autofluorescence signals (mostly arising from the skin and gut), which need to be separated from those of targeted fluorophores. Fluorescence-based imaging is also affected by absorbing and scattering properties of tissue in both the visible and to a lesser extent the near-infrared (NIR) regions. However, the small size of typical animal models (usually mice) often permits the detection of enough light arising even from relatively deep locations to allow the capture of signals with an acceptable signal-to-noise ratio. Multispectral imaging, through its ability to separate autofluorescence from label fluorescence, can increase sensitivity as much as 300 times compared to conventional approaches, and concomitantly improve quantitative accuracy. In the NIR region, autofluorescence, while still significant, poses less of a problem. However, the task of disentangling signals from multiple fluorophores remains. Multispectral imaging allows the separation of five or more fluorophores, with each signal quantitated and visualized separately. Preclinical small animal imaging is often accompanied by microscopic analysis, both before and after the in vivo phase. This can involve tissue culture manipulations and/or histological examination of fixed or frozen tissue. Due to the same advantages in sensitivity, quantitation, and multiplexing, microscopy-based multispectral techniques form an excellent complement to in vivo imaging.

[1]  J. Mansfield,et al.  Multispectral imaging in biology and medicine: Slices of life , 2006, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[2]  R S Balaban,et al.  Challenges in small animal noninvasive imaging. , 2001, ILAR journal.

[3]  Nahum Gat,et al.  Imaging spectroscopy using tunable filters: a review , 2000, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[4]  R M Levenson,et al.  Quantification of immunohistochemistry—issues concerning methods, utility and semiquantitative assessment II , 2006, Histopathology.

[5]  Torsten Hothorn,et al.  Anatomische Genauigkeit der interaktiven und automatischen rigiden Registrierung zwischen Röntgen-CT und FDG-PET , 2007 .

[6]  Richard M Levenson,et al.  Autofluorescence removal, multiplexing, and automated analysis methods for in-vivo fluorescence imaging. , 2005, Journal of biomedical optics.

[7]  James H Thrall,et al.  FDG-PET CT for tumor imaging. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[8]  I. Barshack,et al.  Spectrally Resolved Morphometry of the Nucleus in Hepatocytes Stained by Four Histological Methods , 1998, The Histochemical Journal.

[9]  Lihong V. Wang,et al.  Functional photoacoustic microscopy for high-resolution and noninvasive in vivo imaging , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[10]  A. Del Guerra,et al.  An integrated PET-SPECT small animal imager: preliminary results , 1999, 1999 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium. Conference Record. 1999 Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (Cat. No.99CH37019).

[11]  M. Versluis,et al.  Ultrasound-induced gas release from contrast agent microbubbles , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[12]  J Hornegger,et al.  Anatomical accuracy of interactive and automated rigid registration between X-ray CT and FDG-PET , 2007, Nuklearmedizin.

[13]  Richard M. Levenson,et al.  Beyond image cubes: an agile lamp for practical 100% photon-efficient spectral imaging , 2001, SPIE BiOS.

[14]  Peter Banks,et al.  Novel high-sensitivity fluorescence polarization reader , 2001, SPIE BiOS.

[15]  B. Rice,et al.  Quantitative comparison of the sensitivity of detection of fluorescent and bioluminescent reporters in animal models. , 2004, Molecular imaging.

[16]  A. Klibanov Molecular imaging with targeted ultrasound contrast microbubbles. , 2005, Ernst Schering Research Foundation workshop.

[17]  Lihong V. Wang,et al.  In vivo imaging of subcutaneous structures using functional photoacoustic microscopy , 2007, Nature Protocols.

[18]  R Weissleder,et al.  Molecular imaging. , 2009, Radiology.

[19]  S. Gambhir,et al.  Multimodality imaging of tumor xenografts and metastases in mice with combined small-animal PET, small-animal CT, and bioluminescence imaging. , 2007, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[20]  Xiaofeng Zhang,et al.  A spatial and temporal comparison of hemodynamic signals measured using optical and functional magnetic resonance imaging during activation in the human primary visual cortex , 2007, NeuroImage.

[21]  Vasilis Ntziachristos,et al.  In Vivo Tomographic Imaging of Near-Infrared Fluorescent Probes , 2002 .

[22]  Accuracy of 3D acquisition mode for myocardial FDG PET studies using a BGO-based scanner , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[23]  D L Farkas,et al.  Non-invasive image acquisition and advanced processing in optical bioimaging. , 1998, Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society.

[24]  Richard M Levenson,et al.  Spectral imaging perspective on cytomics , 2006, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[25]  Vasilis Ntziachristos,et al.  A submillimeter resolution fluorescence molecular imaging system for small animal imaging. , 2003, Medical physics.

[26]  Vasilis Ntziachristos,et al.  Looking and listening to light: the evolution of whole-body photonic imaging , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[27]  S. Nie,et al.  In vivo cancer targeting and imaging with semiconductor quantum dots , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[28]  Andrew R. Harvey,et al.  Signal-to-noise analysis of various imaging systems , 2001, SPIE BiOS.

[29]  FDG small animal PET permits early detection of malignant cells in a xenograft murine model , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[30]  Shuming Nie,et al.  Quantum dot-encoded beads. , 2005, Methods in molecular biology.

[31]  G Lucignani,et al.  Instrumentation and probes for molecular and cellular imaging. , 2007, The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging : official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN) [and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology (IAR), [and] Section of the Society of....

[32]  Marina V Backer,et al.  Molecular imaging of VEGF receptors in angiogenic vasculature with single-chain VEGF-based probes , 2007, Nature Medicine.

[33]  Peter J. Miller,et al.  Multispectral imaging with a liquid crystal tunable filter , 1995, Other Conferences.

[34]  Abass Alavi,et al.  Functional Imaging of Cancer with Emphasis on Molecular Techniques , 2007, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[35]  R. Weissleder,et al.  Fluorescence imaging with near-infrared light: new technological advances that enable in vivo molecular imaging , 2002, European Radiology.

[36]  B. Rice,et al.  In vivo imaging of light-emitting probes. , 2001, Journal of biomedical optics.

[37]  Britton Chance,et al.  Diffuse optical tomography of highly heterogeneous media , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[38]  Richard M Levenson,et al.  Distinguished photons: increased contrast with multispectral in vivo fluorescence imaging. , 2005, BioTechniques.

[39]  G W Moore,et al.  Image analysis software for the detection of preneoplastic and early neoplastic lesions. , 1994, Cancer letters.

[40]  Shuming Nie,et al.  Quantum-dot nanocrystals for ultrasensitive biological labeling and multicolor optical encoding. , 2002, Journal of biomedical optics.