The Optimized Fabrication of Nanobubbles as Ultrasound Contrast Agents for Tumor Imaging

Nanobubbles, which have the potential for ultrasonic targeted imaging and treatment in tumors, have been a research focus in recent years. With the current methods, however, the prepared uniformly sized nanobubbles either undergo post-formulation manipulation, such as centrifugation, after the mixture of microbubbles and nanobubbles, or require the addition of amphiphilic surfactants. These processes influence the nanobubble stability, possibly create material waste, and complicate the preparation process. In the present work, we directly prepared uniformly sized nanobubbles by modulating the thickness of a phospholipid film without the purification processes or the addition of amphiphilic surfactants. The fabricated nanobubbles from the optimal phospholipid film thickness exhibited optimal physical characteristics, such as uniform bubble size, good stability, and low toxicity. We also evaluated the enhanced imaging ability of the nanobubbles both in vitro and in vivo. The in vivo enhancement intensity in the tumor was stronger than that of SonoVue after injection (UCA; 2 min: 162.47 ± 8.94 dB vs. 132.11 ± 5.16 dB, P < 0.01; 5 min: 128.38.47 ± 5.06 dB vs. 68.24 ± 2.07 dB, P < 0.01). Thus, the optimal phospholipid film thickness can lead to nanobubbles that are effective for tumor imaging.

[1]  J. Willmann,et al.  Molecular ultrasound imaging: current status and future directions. , 2010, Clinical radiology.

[2]  Jonathan R Lindner,et al.  Molecular imaging with contrast ultrasound and targeted microbubbles , 2004, Journal of Nuclear Cardiology.

[3]  S. L. Bridal,et al.  The performance of PEGylated nanocapsules of perfluorooctyl bromide as an ultrasound contrast agent. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[4]  Robert C. Wolpert,et al.  A Review of the , 1985 .

[5]  Andrew D. Miller Lipid-Based Nanoparticles in Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy , 2013, Journal of drug delivery.

[6]  E. Unger,et al.  Targeted-Microbubble Binding Selectively to GPIIb IIIa Receptors of Platelet Thrombi , 2002, Investigative radiology.

[7]  T. Hwang,et al.  Development and evaluation of perfluorocarbon nanobubbles for apomorphine delivery. , 2009, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[8]  Sergio Uzzau,et al.  Development of polymeric microbubbles targeted to prostate-specific membrane antigen as prototype of novel ultrasound contrast agents. , 2011, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[9]  Zhong-gao Gao,et al.  Multifunctional nanoparticles for combining ultrasonic tumor imaging and targeted chemotherapy. , 2007, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[10]  J. Kuszak,et al.  Development of inherently echogenic liposomes as an ultrasonic contrast agent. , 1996, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

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

[12]  R. Weissleder Molecular Imaging in Cancer , 2006, Science.

[13]  A. Evangelista,et al.  Specific targeting of human inflamed endothelium and in situ vascular tissue transfection by the use of ultrasound contrast agents. , 2009, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[14]  M. Wan,et al.  Optimal design and experimental investigation of surfactant encapsulated microbubbles. , 2006, Ultrasonics.

[15]  Hiroyuki Honda,et al.  The effect of RGD peptide-conjugated magnetite cationic liposomes on cell growth and cell sheet harvesting. , 2005, Biomaterials.

[16]  R K Jain,et al.  Openings between defective endothelial cells explain tumor vessel leakiness. , 2000, The American journal of pathology.

[17]  Mark Borden,et al.  Ultrasound microbubble contrast agents: fundamentals and application to gene and drug delivery. , 2007, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[18]  Francesco Stellacci,et al.  Effect of surface properties on nanoparticle-cell interactions. , 2010, Small.

[19]  P. Burns,et al.  Microbubble-enhanced US in body imaging: what role? , 2010, Radiology.

[20]  Inga Cicenaite,et al.  Composition of PLGA and PEI/DNA nanoparticles improves ultrasound-mediated gene delivery in solid tumors in vivo. , 2008, Cancer letters.

[21]  John C Chappell,et al.  Targeted delivery of nanoparticles bearing fibroblast growth factor-2 by ultrasonic microbubble destruction for therapeutic arteriogenesis. , 2008, Small.

[22]  G. V. van Dam,et al.  Advanced carotid plaque imaging. , 2010, European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery.

[23]  R K Jain,et al.  Vascular permeability in a human tumor xenograft: molecular size dependence and cutoff size. , 1995, Cancer research.

[24]  H. Maeda,et al.  Polymeric drugs for efficient tumor-targeted drug delivery based on EPR-effect. , 2009, European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V.

[25]  Y. Liu,et al.  Efficacy of contrast-enhanced US and magnetic microbubbles targeted to vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 for molecular imaging of atherosclerosis. , 2011, Radiology.

[26]  Luis Solorio,et al.  Formulation and characterization of echogenic lipid-Pluronic nanobubbles. , 2009, Molecular pharmaceutics.

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

[28]  Khaled Greish,et al.  Enhanced permeability and retention of macromolecular drugs in solid tumors: A royal gate for targeted anticancer nanomedicines , 2007, Journal of drug targeting.

[29]  T. Pons,et al.  Synthesis, encapsulation, purification and coupling of single quantum dots in phospholipid micelles for their use in cellular and in vivo imaging , 2007, Nature Protocols.

[30]  V. Dilsizian,et al.  Delayed recovery of fatty acid metabolism after transient myocardial ischemia: A potential imaging target for “ischemic memory” , 2007, Current cardiology reports.

[31]  C. Nimsky,et al.  Development and characterization of new nanoscaled ultrasound active lipid dispersions as contrast agents. , 2011, European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V.

[32]  P. Couvreur,et al.  Nanoparticles in cancer therapy and diagnosis. , 2002, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

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

[34]  S. Kaul,et al.  Myocardial Contrast Echocardiography , 2004, Circulation.

[35]  Chulhong Kim,et al.  Multifunctional microbubbles and nanobubbles for photoacoustic and ultrasound imaging. , 2010, Journal of biomedical optics.

[36]  Mark B. Flegg,et al.  Rayleigh theory of ultrasound scattering applied to liquid-filled contrast nanoparticles , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[37]  Dar-Bin Shieh,et al.  Iron oxide nanoparticles for targeted cancer imaging and diagnostics. , 2012, Nanomedicine : nanotechnology, biology, and medicine.

[38]  H. Maeda The enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect in tumor vasculature: the key role of tumor-selective macromolecular drug targeting. , 2001, Advances in enzyme regulation.

[39]  J. G. Miller,et al.  High-frequency ultrasonic detection of thrombi with a targeted contrast system. , 1997, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[40]  A. Giaccia,et al.  The unique physiology of solid tumors: opportunities (and problems) for cancer therapy. , 1998, Cancer research.

[41]  Katherine W Ferrara,et al.  Lipid-shelled vehicles: engineering for ultrasound molecular imaging and drug delivery. , 2009, Accounts of chemical research.

[42]  R. Esenaliev,et al.  Enhancement of Drug Delivery in Tumors by Using Interaction of Nanoparticles with Ultrasound Radiation , 2005, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[43]  R. Jain,et al.  Regulation of transport pathways in tumor vessels: role of tumor type and microenvironment. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[44]  M. Wheatley,et al.  Development and characterization of a nano-scale contrast agent. , 2004, Ultrasonics.

[45]  F. Marshall,et al.  In vivo molecular and cellular imaging with quantum dots. , 2005, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[46]  S. Kaul,et al.  Assessment of Endogenous and Therapeutic Arteriogenesis by Contrast Ultrasound Molecular Imaging of Integrin Expression , 2005, Circulation.

[47]  C. Hung,et al.  Acoustically active perfluorocarbon nanoemulsions as drug delivery carriers for camptothecin: drug release and cytotoxicity against cancer cells. , 2009, Ultrasonics.

[48]  F Forsberg,et al.  Ultrasound contrast agents: a review. , 1994, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[49]  Flemming Forsberg,et al.  Surfactant-stabilized contrast agent on the nanoscale for diagnostic ultrasound imaging. , 2006, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[50]  Samuel A Wickline,et al.  Sonic activation of molecularly-targeted nanoparticles accelerates transmembrane lipid delivery to cancer cells through contact-mediated mechanisms: implications for enhanced local drug delivery. , 2005, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[51]  N. Rapoport,et al.  Application of ultrasound for targeted nanotherapy of malignant tumors , 2009, Acoustical physics.