Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy
Published in: Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy 2/2014

01-04-2014 | Review Article

Preclinical Imaging: an Essential Ally in Modern Biosciences

Authors: Lídia Cunha, Ildiko Horvath, Sara Ferreira, Joana Lemos, Pedro Costa, Domingos Vieira, Dániel S. Veres, Krisztián Szigeti, Teresa Summavielle, Domokos Máthé, Luís F. Metello

Published in: Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy | Issue 2/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Translational research is changing the practice of modern medicine and the way in which health problems are approached and solved. The use of small-animal models in basic and preclinical sciences is a major keystone for these kinds of research and development strategies, representing a bridge between discoveries at the molecular level and clinical implementation in diagnostics and/or therapeutics. The development of high-resolution in vivo imaging technologies provides a unique opportunity for studying disease in real time, in a quantitative way, at the molecular level, along with the ability to repeatedly and non-invasively monitor disease progression or response to treatment. The greatest advantages of preclinical imaging techniques include the reduction of biological variability and the opportunity to acquire, in continuity, an impressive amount of unique information (without interfering with the biological process under study) in distinct forms, repeated or modulated as needed, along with the substantial reduction in the number of animals required for a particular study, fully complying with 3R (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) policies. The most suitable modalities for small-animal in vivo imaging applications are based on nuclear medicine techniques (essentially, positron emission tomography [PET] and single photon emission computed tomography [SPECT]), optical imaging (OI), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging (MRSI), and ultrasound. Each modality has intrinsic advantages and limitations. More recently, aiming to overcome the inherent limitations of each imaging modality, multimodality devices designed to provide complementary information upon the pathophysiological process under study have gained popularity. The combination of high-resolution modalities, like micro-CT or micro-MRI, with highly sensitive techniques providing functional information, such as micro-PET or micro-SPECT, will continue to broaden the horizons of research in such key areas as infection, oncology, cardiology, and neurology, contributing not only to the understanding of the underlying mechanisms of disease, but also providing efficient and unique tools for evaluating new chemical entities and candidate drugs. The added value of small-animal imaging techniques has driven their increasing use by pharmaceutical companies, contract research organizations, and research institutions.
Literature
1.
Milne CP, Kaitin KI. Translational medicine: an engine of change for bringing new technology to community health. Sci Transl Med. 2009 Nov 4;1(5):5cm5.
2.
Lewis JS, Achilefu S, Garbow JR, Laforest R, Welch MJ. Small animal imaging: current technology and perspectives for oncological imaging. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38(16):2173–88.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Franc BL, Acton PD, Mari C, Hasegawa BH. Small-animal SPECT and SPECT/CT: important tools for preclinical investigation. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(10):1651–63.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Allport JR, Weissleder R. In vivo imaging of gene and cell therapies. Exp Hematol. 2001;29(11):1237–46.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Pomper MG, Lee JS. Small animal imaging in drug development. Curr Pharm Des. 2005;11(25):3247–72.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Deng WP, Wu CC, Lee CC, Yang WK, Wang HE, Liu RS, et al. Serial in vivo imaging of the lung metastases model and gene therapy using HSV1-tk and ganciclovir. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(5):877–84.PubMed
7.
Turetschek K, Floyd E, Helbich T, Roberts TP, Shames DM, Wendland MF, et al. MRI assessment of microvascular characteristics in experimental breast tumors using a new blood pool contrast agent (MS-325) with correlations to histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14(3):237–42.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Cheng Z, Mahmood A, Li H, Davison A, Jones AG. [99mTcOAADT]-(CH2)2-NEt2: a potential small-molecule single-photon emission computed tomography probe for imaging metastatic melanoma. Cancer Res. 2005;65(12):4979–86.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, Silverman DH, Coleman RE, Phelps ME. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med. 2001;42(5 Suppl):1S–93S.PubMed
10.
Bading JR, Shields AF. Imaging of cell proliferation: status and prospects. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(Suppl 2):64S–80S.PubMedCrossRef
11.
12.
Gambhir SS, Herschman HR, Cherry SR, Barrio JR, Satyamurthy N, Toyokuni T, et al. Imaging transgene expression with radionuclide imaging technologies. Neoplasia. 2000;2(1–2):118–38.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
13.
Orlova A, Nilsson FY, Wikman M, Widstrom C, Stahl S, Carlsson J, et al. Comparative in vivo evaluation of technetium and iodine labels on an anti-HER2 affibody for single-photon imaging of HER2 expression in tumors. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(3):512–9.PubMed
14.
Foss CA, Mease RC, Fan H, Wang Y, Ravert HT, Dannals RF, et al. Radiolabeled small-molecule ligands for prostate-specific membrane antigen: in vivo imaging in experimental models of prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(11):4022–8.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Haubner RH, Wester HJ, Weber WA, Schwaiger M. Radiotracer-based strategies to image angiogenesis. Q J Nucl Med. 2003;47(3):189–99.PubMed
16.
Jia B, Shi J, Yang Z, Xu B, Liu Z, Zhao H, et al. 99mTc-labeled cyclic RGDfK dimer: initial evaluation for SPECT imaging of glioma integrin alphavbeta3 expression. Bioconjugate Chem. 2006;17(4):1069–76.CrossRef
17.
18.
Holland JP, Lewis JS, Dehdashti F. Assessing tumor hypoxia by positron emission tomography with Cu-ATSM. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2009;53(2):193–200.
19.
Madar I, Huang Y, Ravert H, Dalrymple SL, Davidson NE, Isaacs JT, et al. Detection and quantification of the evolution dynamics of apoptosis using the PET voltage sensor 18F-fluorobenzyl triphenyl phosphonium. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(5):774–80.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Murakami Y, Takamatsu H, Taki J, Tatsumi M, Noda A, Ichise R, et al. 18F-labelled annexin V: a PET tracer for apoptosis imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2004;31(4):469–74.CrossRef
21.
Jaffer FA, Weissleder R. Seeing within: molecular imaging of the cardiovascular system. Circ Res. 2004;94(4):433–45.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Lamb HJ, van der Meer RW, de Roos A, Bax JJ. Cardiovascular molecular MR imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2007;34(Suppl 1):S99–104.CrossRef
23.
Hua J, Dobrucki LW, Sadeghi MM, Zhang J, Bourke BN, Cavaliere P, et al. Noninvasive imaging of angiogenesis with a 99mTc-labeled peptide targeted at alphavbeta3 integrin after murine hindlimb ischemia. Circulation. 2005;111(24):3255–60.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Khaw BA, Tekabe Y, Johnson LL. Imaging experimental atherosclerotic lesions in ApoE knockout mice: enhanced targeting with Z2D3-anti-DTPA bispecific antibody and 99mTc-labeled negatively charged polymers. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(5):868–76.PubMed
25.
Kolodgie FD, Petrov A, Virmani R, Narula N, Verjans JW, Weber DK, et al. Targeting of apoptotic macrophages and experimental atheroma with radiolabeled annexin V: a technique with potential for noninvasive imaging of vulnerable plaque. Circulation. 2003;108(25):3134–9.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Schafers M, Riemann B, Kopka K, Breyholz HJ, Wagner S, Schafers KP, et al. Scintigraphic imaging of matrix metalloproteinase activity in the arterial wall in vivo. Circulation. 2004;109(21):2554–9.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Acton PD, Kung HF. Small animal imaging with high resolution single photon emission tomography. Nucl Med Biol. 2003;30(8):889–95.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Lancelot S, Zimmer L. Small-animal positron emission tomography as a tool for neuropharmacology. Trend Pharmacol Sci. 2010;31(9):411–7.CrossRef
29.
Zanzonico P. Noninvasive imaging for supporting basic research. In: Kiessling F, Pichler BJ, editors. Small animal imaging—basics and practical guide. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 3–16.CrossRef
30.
Kagadis GC, Loudos G, Katsanos K, Langer SG, Nikiforidis GC. In vivo small animal imaging: current status and future prospects. Med Phys. 2010;37(12):6421–42.PubMedCrossRef
31.
32.
Massoud TF, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging in living subjects: seeing fundamental biological processes in a new light. Genes Dev. 2003;17(5):545–80.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Grassi R, Lagalla R, Rotondo A. Genomics, proteomics, MEMS and SAIF: which role for diagnostic imaging? La Radiologia medica. 2008;113(6):775–8.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Alberti C. From molecular imaging in preclinical/clinical oncology to theranostic applications in targeted tumor therapy. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2012;16(14):1925–33.PubMed
35.
Meikle SR, Kench P, Kassiou M, Banati RB. Small animal SPECT and its place in the matrix of molecular imaging technologies. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(22):R45–61.PubMedCrossRef
36.
37.
38.
39.
Kim H, Furenlid LR, Crawford MJ, Wilson DW, Barber HB, Peterson TE, et al. SemiSPECT: a small-animal single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imager based on eight cadmium zinc telluride (CZT) detector arrays. Med Phys. 2006;33(2):465–74.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
40.
41.
Phelps ME. PET: the merging of biology and imaging into molecular imaging. J Nucl Med. 2000;41(4):661–81.PubMed
42.
Kowalski J, Henze M, Schuhmacher J, Mäcke HR, Hofmann M, Haberkorn U. Evaluation of Positron Emission Tomography Imaging Using [68 Ga]-DOTA-D Phe1-Tyr3-Octreotide in Comparison to [111In]-DTPAOC SPECT. First Results in Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors. Mol Imaging Biol. 2003;5(1):42–8.PubMedCrossRef
43.
44.
Basu S, Urhan M, Rosenbaum J, Alavi A. PET and PET/CT in the management of thyroid cancer. Method Mol Biol. 2011;727:205–24.CrossRef
45.
46.
Levin CS, Zaidi H. Current trends in preclinical PET system design. PET Clin. 2007;2(2):125–60.CrossRef
47.
Yao R, Lecomte R, Crawford ES. Small-animal PET: what is it, and why do we need it? J Nucl Med Technol. 2012 Sep;40(3):157-65.
48.
49.
Lecomte R. Technology challenges in small animal PET imaging. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A. 2004;527(1–2):157–65.CrossRef
50.
Comley J. In vivo preclinical imaging: an essential tool in translational research. Drug Discovery World. 2011:58–71.
51.
Beekman F, van der Have F. The pinhole: gateway to ultra-high-resolution three-dimensional radionuclide imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(2):151–61.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Shao Y, Cherry SR, Farahani K, Slates R, Silverman RW, Meadors K, et al. Development of a PET detector system compatible with MRI/NMR systems. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44(3):1167–71.CrossRef
53.
54.
de Kemp RA, Epstein FH, Catana C, Tsui BM, Ritman EL. Small-animal molecular imaging methods. J Nucl Med. 2010;1(51 Suppl 1):18S–32S.CrossRef
55.
Fleming JS, Alaamer AS. Influence of collimator characteristics on quantification in SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1996;37(11):1832–6.PubMed
56.
Chatziioannou AF, Cherry SR, Shao Y, Silverman RW, Meadors K, Farquhar TH, et al. Performance evaluation of microPET: a high-resolution lutetium oxyorthosilicate PET scanner for animal imaging. J Nucl Med. 1999;40(7):1164–75.PubMedCentralPubMed
57.
Levin CS, Hoffman EJ. Calculation of positron range and its effect on the fundamental limit of positron emission tomography system spatial resolution. Phys Med Biol. 1999;44(3):781.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Tai YC, Ruangma A, Rowland D, Siegel S, Newport DF, Chow PL, et al. Performance evaluation of the microPET focus: a third-generation microPET scanner dedicated to animal imaging. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(3):455–63.PubMed
59.
Beekman FJ, van der Have F, Vastenhouw B, van der Linden AJ, van Rijk PP, Burbach JP, et al. U-SPECT-I: a novel system for submillimeter-resolution tomography with radiolabeled molecules in mice. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(7):1194–200.PubMed
60.
Vastenhouw B, Beekman F. Submillimeter total-body murine imaging with U-SPECT-I. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(3):487–93.PubMed
61.
Chatziioannou AF. Instrumentation for molecular imaging in preclinical research: Micro-PET and Micro-SPECT. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2005;2(6):533-6, 10-11.
62.
Henriksen G, Drzezga A. Imaging in neurology research II: PET imaging in CNS disorders. In: Kiessling F, Pichler BJ, editors. Small animal imaging—basics and practical guide. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 499–513.CrossRef
63.
Hume SP, Gunn RN, Jones T. Pharmacological constraints associated with positron emission tomographic scanning of small laboratory animals. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25(2):173–6.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Judenhofer MS, Wiehr S, Kukuk D, Fischer K, Pichler BJ. Guidelines for nuclear image analysis. In: Kiessling F, Pichler BJ, editors. Small animal imaging—basics and practical guide. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 379–86.CrossRef
65.
Cavanaugh D, Johnson E, Price RE, Kurie J, Travis EL, Cody DD. In vivo respiratory-gated micro-CT imaging in small-animal oncology models. Mol Imaging. 2004;3(1):55–62.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Ritman EL. Current status of developments and applications of micro-CT. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2011;15(13):531–52.CrossRef
67.
Badea CT, Drangova M, Holdsworth DW, Johnson GA. In vivo small-animal imaging using micro-CT and digital subtraction angiography. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(19):R319–50.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
68.
69.
Pietsch H. CT contrast agents. In: Kiessling F, Pichler BJ, editors. Small animal imaging—basics and practical guide. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 141–9.CrossRef
70.
Kalender WA, Deak P, Engelke K, Karolczak M. X-ray and X-ray CT. In: Kiessling F, Pichler BJ, editors. Small animal imaging—basics and practical guide. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 125–39.CrossRef
71.
Dufort S, Sancey L, Wenk C, Josserand V, Coll JL. Optical small animal imaging in the drug discovery process. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2010;1798(12):2266–73.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Tremoleda JL, Khalil M, Gompels LL, Wylezinska-Arridge M, Vincent T, Gsell W. Imaging technologies for preclinical models of bone and joint disorders. EJNMMI Res. 2011;1(1):11.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
73.
Koba W, Kim K, Lipton ML, Jelicks L, Das B, Herbst L, et al. Imaging devices for use in small animals. Semin Nucl Med. 2011;41(3):151–65.PubMedCrossRef
74.
Jakob P. Small animal magnetic resonance imaging: basic principles, instrumentation and practical issues. In: Kiessling F, Pichler BJ, editors. Small animal imaging—basics and practical guide. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 151–64.CrossRef
75.
76.
Leroy-Willig A, Geldwerth-Feniger G. Nuclear magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. In: Ntziachristos V, Leroy-Willig A, Tavitian B, editors. Textbook of in vivo imaging in vertebrates. UK: Wiley; 2007. p. 1–56.
77.
Weber WA, Kiessling F. Imaging in oncology research. In: Kiessling F, Pichler BJ, editors. Small animal imaging—basics and practical guide. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011. p. 543–64.CrossRef
78.
Schaefer PW, Grant PE, Gonzalez RG. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the brain. Radiology. 2000;217(2):331–45.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Heeger DJ, Ress D. What does fMRI tell us about neuronal activity? Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002;3(2):142–51.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Goetti R, O’Gorman R, Khan N, Kellenberger CJ, Scheer I. Arterial spin labelling MRI for assessment of cerebral perfusion in children with moyamoya disease: comparison with dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI. Neuroradiology. 2013;55(5):639–47.PubMedCrossRef
81.
Cutajar M, Thomas DL, Banks T, Clark CA, Golay X, Gordon I. Repeatability of renal arterial spin labelling MRI in healthy subjects. MAGMA. 2012;25(2):145–53.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Thomas D, Wells J. MR angiography and arterial spin labelling. Method Mol Biol. 2011;711:327–45.CrossRef
83.
Kazan SM, Chappell MA, Payne SJ. Modelling the effects of cardiac pulsations in arterial spin labelling. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55(3):799–816.PubMedCrossRef
84.
Richards TL. Multinuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Imaging. Encyclopedia of Analytical Chemistry. New York: Wiley; 2006.
85.
Rudin M. Imaging techniques. Molecular imaging: basic principles and applications in biomedical research. London: Imperial College Press; 2005. p. 45–140.
86.
Rosen Y, Lenkinski RE. Recent advances in magnetic resonance neurospectroscopy. Neurotherapeutics. 2007;4(3):330–45.PubMedCrossRef
87.
Gujar SK, Maheshwari S, Bjorkman-Burtscher I, Sundgren PC. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy. J Neuroophthalmol. 2005;25(3):217–26.PubMedCrossRef
88.
89.
90.
Forster D, Davies K, Williams S. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy in vivo of neurochemicals in a transgenic model of Alzheimer’s disease: a longitudinal study of metabolites, relaxation time, and behavioral analysis in TASTPM and wild-type mice. Magn Reson Med. 2013;69(4):944–55.
91.
He Q, Xu RZ, Shkarin P, Pizzorno G, Lee-French CH, Rothman DL, et al. Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging of tumor metabolic markers for cancer diagnosis, metabolic phenotyping, and characterization of tumor microenvironment. Dis Markers. 2003;19(2–3):69–94.PubMed
92.
Bremer C, Ntziachristos V, Weissleder R. Optical-based molecular imaging: contrast agents and potential medical applications. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(2):231–43.PubMed
93.
Chin PT, Welling MM, Meskers SC, Valdes Olmos RA, Tanke H, van Leeuwen FW. Optical imaging as an expansion of nuclear medicine: Cerenkov-based luminescence vs fluorescence-based luminescence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(8):1283–91.PubMedCrossRef
94.
Wilson T, Hastings J. Bioluminescence. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 1988;14:197–230.CrossRef
95.
Greer LF III, Szalay AA. Imaging of light emission from the expression of luciferases in living cells and organisms: a review. Luminescence. 2002;17(1):43-74.
96.
Weissleder R. Scaling down imaging: molecular mapping of cancer in mice. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002;2(1):11–8.PubMedCrossRef
97.
Culver J, Akers W, Achilefu S. Multimodality molecular imaging with combined optical and SPECT/PET modalities. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(2):169–72.PubMedCrossRef
98.
Ntziachristos V, Bremer C, Weissleder R. Fluorescence imaging with near-infrared light: new technological advances that enable in vivo molecular imaging. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(1):195–208.PubMed
99.
100.
101.
Robertson R, Germanos MS, Li C, Mitchell GS, Cherry SR, Silva MD. Optical imaging of Cerenkov light generation from positron-emitting radiotracers. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54(16):N355–65.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
102.
103.
Spinelli AE, Ferdeghini M, Cavedon C, Zivelonghi E, Calandrino R, Fenzi A, et al. First human Cerenkography. J Biomed Opt. 2013;18(2):20502.PubMedCrossRef
104.
Vooijs M, Jonkers J, Lyons S, Berns A. Noninvasive imaging of spontaneous retinoblastoma pathway-dependent tumors in mice. Cancer Res. 2002;62(6):1862–7.PubMed
105.
Liang HD, Blomley MJ. The role of ultrasound in molecular imaging. British J Radiol. 2003;76 Spec No 2:S140–50.
106.
Coatney RW. Ultrasound imaging: principles and applications in rodent research. ILAR J. 2001;42(3):233–47.PubMedCrossRef
107.
Tremoleda JL, Kerton A, Gsell W. Anaesthesia and physiological monitoring during in vivo imaging of laboratory rodents: considerations on experimental outcomes and animal welfare. EJNMMI Res. 2012;2(1):44.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
108.
Skresanova IV, Barannik EA. Correlation functions and power spectra of Doppler response signals in ultrasonic medical applications. Ultrasonics. 2012;52(5):676–84.PubMedCrossRef
109.
110.
Greco A, Mancini M, Gargiulo S, Gramanzini M, Claudio PP, Brunetti A, et al. Ultrasound biomicroscopy in small animal research: applications in molecular and preclinical imaging. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2012;2012:519238.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
111.
Golden HB, Sunder S, Liu Y, Peng X, Dostal DE. In utero assessment of cardiovascular function in the embryonic mouse heart using high-resolution ultrasound biomicroscopy. Method Mol Biol. 2012;843:245–63.CrossRef
112.
Cheung AM, Brown AS, Cucevic V, Roy M, Needles A, Yang V, et al. Detecting vascular changes in tumour xenografts using micro-ultrasound and micro-ct following treatment with VEGFR-2 blocking antibodies. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007;33(8):1259–68.PubMedCrossRef
113.
Kaufmann BA, Lankford M, Behm CZ, French BA, Klibanov AL, Xu Y, et al. High-resolution myocardial perfusion imaging in mice with high-frequency echocardiographic detection of a depot contrast agent. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2007;20(2):136–43.PubMedCrossRef
114.
Alves KZ, Soletti RC, de Britto MA, de Matos DG, Soldan M, Borges HL, et al. In Vivo endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopic imaging in a mouse model of colorectal cancer. Acad Radiol. 2013;20(1):90–8.PubMedCrossRef
115.
Alexandrakis G, Rannou FR, Chatziioannou AF. Effect of optical property estimation accuracy on tomographic bioluminescence imaging: simulation of a combined optical-PET (OPET) system. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51(8):2045–53.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
116.
Peter J, Ruehle H, Stamm V, Schulz RB, Smith MF, Welch B, et al. Development and initial results of a dual-modality SPECT/optical small animal imager. Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record; 2005 IEEE; 2005 23–29 Oct: p. 4.
117.
Hyde D, de Kleine R, MacLaurin SA, Miller E, Brooks DH, Krucker T, et al. Hybrid FMT-CT imaging of amyloid-beta plaques in a murine Alzheimer’s disease model. Neuroimage. 2009;44(4):1304–11.PubMedCrossRef
118.
Wen Z, Fahrig R, Williams ST, Pelc NJ. Shimming with permanent magnets for the x-ray detector in a hybrid x-ray/ MR system. Med Phys. 2008;35(9):3895–902.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
119.
Gulsen G, Birgul O, Unlu MB, Shafiiha R, Nalcioglu O. Combined diffuse optical tomography (DOT) and MRI system for cancer imaging in small animals. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2006;5(4):351–63.PubMed
120.
Kundu BK, Stolin AV, Pole J, Baumgart L, Fontaine M, Wojcik R, et al. Tri-modality small animal imaging system. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2006;53(1):66–70.CrossRef
121.
Veit-Haibach P, Kuhn FP, Wiesinger F, Delso G, von Schulthess G. PET-MR imaging using a tri-modality PET/CT-MR system with a dedicated shuttle in clinical routine. MAGMA. 2013;26(1):25–35.
122.
Tsukamoto E, Ochi S. PET/CT today: system and its impact on cancer diagnosis. Ann Nucl Med. 2006;20(4):255–67.PubMedCrossRef
123.
Bergeron M, Cadorette J, Beaudoin JF, Lepage MD, Robert G, Selivanov V, et al. Performance evaluation of the LabPET APD-based digital PET scanner. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2009;56(1):10–6.CrossRef
124.
Levin Klausen T, Hogild Keller S, Vinter Olesen O, Aznar M, Andersen FL. Innovations in PET/CT. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;56(3):268–79.PubMed
125.
Beyer T, Freudenberg LS, Townsend DW, Czernin J. The future of hybrid imaging-part 1: hybrid imaging technologies and SPECT/CT. Insight Imaging. 2011;2(2):161–9.CrossRef
126.
Hammer BE, Christensen NL, Heil BG. Use of a magnetic field to increase the spatial resolution of positron emission tomography. Med Phys. 1994;21(12):1917–20.PubMedCrossRef
127.
Beyer T, Freudenberg LS, Czernin J, Townsend DW. The future of hybrid imaging-part 3: PET/MR, small-animal imaging and beyond. Insight Imaging. 2011;2(3):235–46.CrossRef
128.
Wirrwar A, Vosberg H, Herzog H, Halling H, Weber S, MullerGartner HW. 4.5 Tesla magnetic field reduces range of high-energy positrons—potential implications for positron emission tomography. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44(2):184–9.CrossRef
129.
130.
Wagenknecht G, Kaiser HJ, Mottaghy FM, Herzog H. MRI for attenuation correction in PET: methods and challenges. MAGMA. 2013;26(1):99–113.
131.
Tartis MS, Kruse DE, Zheng H, Zhang H, Kheirolomoom A, Marik J, et al. Dynamic microPET imaging of ultrasound contrast agents and lipid delivery. J Controlled Release. 2008;131(3):160–6.CrossRef
132.
133.
Balcerzyk M, Kontaxakis G, Delgado M, Garcia-Garcia L, Correcher C, Gonzalez AJ, et al. Initial performance evaluation of a high resolution Albira small animal positron emission tomography scanner with monolithic crystals and depth-of-interaction encoding from a user’s perspective. Measurement Sci Technol. 2009;20(10).
134.
Szanda I, Mackewn J, Patay G, Major P, Sunassee K, Mullen GE, et al. National electrical manufacturers association NU-4 performance evaluation of the PET component of the NanoPET/CT preclinical PET/CT Scanner. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(11):1741–7.
135.
Goorden MC, van der Have F, Kreuger R, Ramakers RM, Vastenhouw B, Burbach JP, et al. VECTor: a preclinical imaging system for simultaneous submillimeter SPECT and PET. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(2):306–12.
136.
Goertzen AL, Bao QN, Bergeron M, Blankemeyer E, Blinder S, Canadas M, et al. NEMA NU 4-2008 comparison of preclinical PET imaging systems. J Nucl Med. 2012;53(8):1300–9.PubMedCrossRef
137.
Bao Q, Newport D, Chen M, Stout DB, Chatziioannou AF. Performance evaluation of the inveon dedicated PET preclinical tomograph based on the NEMA NU-4 standards. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(3):401–8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
138.
Herrmann K, Dahlbom M, Nathanson D, Wei L, Radu C, Chatziioannou A, et al. Evaluation of the Genisys4, a bench-top preclinical PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(7):1162–7.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Preclinical Imaging: an Essential Ally in Modern Biosciences
Authors
Lídia Cunha
Ildiko Horvath
Sara Ferreira
Joana Lemos
Pedro Costa
Domingos Vieira
Dániel S. Veres
Krisztián Szigeti
Teresa Summavielle
Domokos Máthé
Luís F. Metello
Publication date
01-04-2014
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 1177-1062
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2000
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40291-013-0062-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy 2/2014 Go to the issue

Review Article

Biomarker Modelling of Early Molecular Changes in Alzheimer’s Disease

Original Research Article

The Effect of Genetic Polymorphisms of Cytochrome P450 CYP2C9, CYP2C19, and CYP2D6 on Drug-Resistant Epilepsy in Turkish Children

Review Article

Blood-Based Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Review Article

Comprehensive Profiling of EGFR/HER Receptors for Personalized Treatment of Gynecologic Cancers

Original Research Article

Association of E-Selectin Gene Polymorphism and Serum PAPP-A with Carotid Atherosclerosis in End-Stage Renal Disease

Original Research Article

MicroRNA-499 rs3746444 Polymorphism and Autoimmune Diseases Risk: A Meta-Analysis
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Pediatric Cardiology Video

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

Cardiopulmonary Comorbidity Video

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Valvular Heart Disease Video

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits