Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Immunoglobulin G (IgG)-Based Imaging Probe Accumulates in M1 Macrophage-Infiltrated Atherosclerotic Plaques Independent of IgG Target Molecule Expression

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Molecular Imaging and Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Vulnerable plaques are key factors for ischemic diseases. Thus, their precise detection is necessary for the diagnosis of such diseases. Immunoglobulin G (IgG)-based imaging probes have been developed for imaging biomolecules related to plaque formation for the diagnosis of atherosclerosis. However, IgG accumulates nonspecifically in atherosclerotic regions, and its accumulation mechanisms have not yet been clarified in detail. Therefore, we explored IgG accumulation mechanisms in atherosclerotic lesions and examined images of radiolabeled IgG for the diagnosis of atherosclerosis.

Procedures

Mouse IgG without specificity to biomolecules was labeled with technetium-99m via 6-hydrazinonicotinate to yield [99mTc]IgG. ApoE−/− or C57BL/6J mice were injected intravenously with [99mTc]IgG, and their aortas were excised 24 h after injection. After radioactivity measurement, serial aortic sections were autoradiographically and histopathologically examined. RAW264.7 macrophages were polarized into M1 or M2 and then treated with [99mTc]IgG. The radioactivities in the cells were measured after 1 h of incubation. [99mTc]IgG uptake in M1 macrophages was also evaluated after the pretreatment with an anti-Fcγ receptor (FcγR) antibody. The expression levels of FcγRs in the cells were measured by western blot analysis.

Results

[99mTc]IgG accumulation levels in the aortas were significantly higher in apoE−/− mice than in C57BL/6J mice (5.1 ± 1.4 vs 2.8 ± 0.5 %ID/g, p < 0.05). Autoradiographic images showed that the accumulation areas highly correlated with the macrophage-infiltrated areas. M1 macrophages showed significantly higher levels of [99mTc]IgG than M2 or M0 (nonpolarized) macrophages [2.2 ± 0.3 (M1) vs 0.5 ± 0.1 (M2), 0.4 ± 0.1 (M0) %dose/mg protein, p < 0.01] and higher expression levels of FcγRI and FcγRII. [99mTc]IgG accumulation in M1 macrophages was suppressed by pretreatment with the anti-FcγR antibody [2.2 ± 0.3 (nonpretreatment) vs 1.2 ± 0.2 (pretreatment) %ID/mg protein, p < 0.01].

Conclusions

IgG accumulated in pro-inflammatory M1 macrophages via FcγRs in atherosclerotic lesions. Thus, the target biomolecule-independent imaging of active inflammation should be taken into account in the diagnosis of atherosclerosis using IgG-based probes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Falk E, Shah PK, Fuster V (1995) Coronary plaque disruption. Circulation 92:657–671

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hanzawa H, Sakamoto T, Kaneko A et al (2015) Combined plasma and tissue proteomic study of atherogenic model mouse: approach to elucidate molecular determinants in atherosclerosis development. J Proteome Res 14:4257–4269

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang X, Connolly TM (2010) Biomarkers of vulnerable atheromatous plaques: translational medicine perspectives. Adv Clin Chem 50:1–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sakamoto T, Hanzawa H, Manri N et al (2016) Discovery and evaluation of biomarkers for atherosclerosis. In: Kuge Y, Shiga T, Tamaki N (eds) Perspectives on nuclear medicine for molecular diagnosis and integrated therapy. Springer Japan, Sapporo, pp. 131–139

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Tarkin JM, Joshi FR, Rudd JH (2014) PET imaging of inflammation in atherosclerosis. Nat Rev Cardiol 11:443–457

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bucerius J, Hyafil F, Verberne HJ et al (2016) Position paper of the Cardiovascular Committee of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) on PET imaging of atherosclerosis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:780–792

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Libby P, Ridker PM, Maseri A (2002) Inflammation and atherosclerosis. Circulation 105:1135–1143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shimizu Y, Kuge Y (2016) Recent advances in the development of PET/SPECT probes for atherosclerosis imaging. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 50:284–291

  9. Temma T, Saji H (2012) Radiolabelled probes for imaging of atherosclerotic plaques. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2:432–447

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Nakamura I, Hasegawa K, Wada Y, Hirase T, Node K, Watanabe Y (2013) Detection of early stage atherosclerotic plaques using PET and CT fusion imaging targeting P-selectin in low density lipoprotein receptor-deficient mice. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 433:47–51

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Temma T, Ogawa Y, Kuge Y et al (2010) Tissue factor detection for selectively discriminating unstable plaques in an atherosclerotic rabbit model. J Nucl Med 51:1979–1986

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuge Y, Takai N, Ogawa Y et al (2010) Imaging with radiolabelled anti-membrane type 1 matrix metalloproteinase (MT1-MMP) antibody: potentials for characterizing atherosclerotic plaques. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37:2093–2104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Larson SM (1985) Radiolabeled monoclonal anti-tumor antibodies in diagnosis and therapy. J Nucl Med 26:538–545

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McCafferty J, Griffiths AD, Winter G, Chiswell DJ (1990) Phage antibodies: filamentous phage displaying antibody variable domains. 348:552–554

  15. Demacker PN, Dormans TP, Koenders EB, Corstens FH (1993) Evaluation of indium-111-polyclonal immunoglobulin G to quantitate atherosclerosis. J Nucl Med 34:1316–1321

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fischman AJ, Rubin RH, Khaw BA et al (1989) Radionuclide imaging of experimental atherosclerosis with nonspecific polyclonal immunoglobulin G. J Nucl Med 30:1095–1100

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Shimizu Y, Hanzawa H, Zhao Y et al (2016) Radioimmunodetection of atherosclerotic lesions focusing on the accumulation mechanism of immunoglobulin G. In: Kuge Y, Shiga T, Tamaki N (eds) Perspectives on nuclear medicine for molecular diagnosis and integrated therapy. Springer Japan, Sapporo, pp. 141–150

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. De Gersem R, Jamar F (2010) Nonspecific human immunoglobulin G for imaging infection and inflammation: what did we learn? 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 So 54:617–628

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Fischman AJ, Rubin RH, White JA et al (1990) Localization of Fc and Fab fragments of nonspecific polyclonal IgG at focal sites of inflammation. J Nucl Med 31:1199–1205

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Abrams MJ, Juweid M, tenKate CI et al (1990) Technetium-99m-human polyclonal IgG radiolabeled via the hydrazino nicotinamide derivative for imaging focal sites of infection in rats. J Nucl Med 31:2022–2028

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ono M, Arano Y, Mukai T et al (2001) Plasma protein binding of (99 m)Tc-labeled hydrazino nicotinamide derivatized polypeptides and peptides. Nucl Med Biol 28:155–164

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Larsen SK, Solomon HF, Caldwell G, Abrams MJ (1995) [99mTc]tricine: a useful precursor complex for the radiolabeling of hydrazinonicotinate protein conjugates. Bioconjug Chem 6:635–638

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Vucic E, Dickson SD, Calcagno C et al (2011) Pioglitazone modulates vascular inflammation in atherosclerotic rabbits noninvasive assessment with FDG-PET-CT and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 4:1100–1109

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhao Y, Kuge Y, Zhao S et al (2007) Comparison of 99mTc-annexin A5 with 18F-FDG for the detection of atherosclerosis in ApoE−/− mice. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34:1747–1755

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhang B, Wang J, Gao J et al (2009) Alternatively activated RAW264.7 macrophages enhance tumor lymphangiogenesis in mouse lung adenocarcinoma. J Cell Biochem 107:134–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mantovani A, Sica A, Sozzani S, Allavena P, Vecchi A, Locati M (2004) The chemokine system in diverse forms of macrophage activation and polarization. Trends Immunol 25:677–686

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chinetti-Gbaguidi G, Baron M, Bouhlel MA et al (2011) Human atherosclerotic plaque alternative macrophages display low cholesterol handling but high phagocytosis because of distinct activities of the PPARgamma and LXRalpha pathways. Circ Res 108:985–995

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Moore KJ, Sheedy FJ, Fisher EA (2013) Macrophages in atherosclerosis: a dynamic balance. Nat Rev Immunol 13:709–721

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. van de Winkel JG, Anderson CL (1991) Biology of human immunoglobulin G Fc receptors. J Leukoc Biol 49:511–524

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Anderson CF, Mosser DM (2002) Cutting edge: biasing immune responses by directing antigen to macrophage Fc gamma receptors. J Immunol (Baltimore, Md : 1950) 168:3697–3701

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Ravetch JV, Bolland S (2001) IgG Fc receptors. Annu Rev Immunol 19:275–290

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ogawa M, Ishino S, Mukai T et al (2004) 18F-FDG accumulation in atherosclerotic plaques: immunohistochemical and PET imaging study. J Nucl Med 45:1245–1250

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Satomi T, Ogawa M, Mori I et al (2013) Comparison of contrast agents for atherosclerosis imaging using cultured macrophages: FDG versus ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide. J Nucl Med 54:999–1004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ziegler WAWSI, Tho’dtmann R, Hanauske A-R, Schwaiger M (1999) Reproducibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 40:1771–1777

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhao Y, Zhao S, Kuge Y, Tamaki N (2013) Elevated 18F-FDG levels in blood and organs after angiotensin II receptor blocker administration: experiment in mice administered telmisartan. J Nucl Med 54:1384–1388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cuesta AM, Sainz-Pastor N, Bonet J, Oliva B, Alvarez-Vallina L (2010) Multivalent antibodies: when design surpasses evolution. Trends Biotechnol 28:355–362

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Broisat A, Hernot S, Toczek J et al (2012) Nanobodies targeting mouse/human VCAM1 for the nuclear imaging of atherosclerotic lesions. Circ Res 110:927–937

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Ogawa M, Magata Y, Kato T et al (2006) Application of 18F-FDG PET for monitoring the therapeutic effect of antiinflammatory drugs on stabilization of vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques. J Nucl Med 47:1845–1850

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhao Y, Fukao K, Zhao S et al (2015) Irbesartan attenuates atherosclerosis in Watanabe heritable hyperlipidemic rabbits: noninvasive imaging of inflammation by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Mol Imaging 14. doi:10.2310/7290.2015.00004

  40. Romer T, Leonhardt H, Rothbauer U (2011) Engineering antibodies and proteins for molecular in vivo imaging. Curr Opin Biotech 22:882–887

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (Grant Numbers 26293268, 15K15440, 24890003, and 26860961) and the Creation of Innovation Centers for Advanced Interdisciplinary Research Areas Program, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Bioanalysis and Molecular Imaging, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Hokkaido University, Kita 12 Nishi 6, Kita-ku, Sapporo, 060-0812, Japan

    Yoichi Shimizu & Mikako Ogawa

  2. Central Institute of Isotope Science, Hokkaido University, Kita 15 Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, 060-0815, Japan

    Yoichi Shimizu, Ken-ichi Nishijima & Yuji Kuge

  3. Center for Exploratory Research, Research & Development Group, Hitachi, Ltd, Hatoyama, 350-0395, Japan

    Hiroko Hanzawa

  4. Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Kita 15 Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, 060-8638, Japan

    Yan Zhao, Sagiri Fukura, Ken-ichi Nishijima, Songji Zhao, Nagara Tamaki & Yuji Kuge

  5. Center for Technology Innovation—Healthcare, Research & Development Group, Hitachi, Ltd., Kokubunji, 185-8601, Japan

    Takeshi Sakamoto

Authors
  1. Yoichi Shimizu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hiroko Hanzawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yan Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sagiri Fukura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ken-ichi Nishijima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Takeshi Sakamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Songji Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Nagara Tamaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mikako Ogawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Yuji Kuge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoichi Shimizu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

N.T. has grant support from Hitachi, Ltd. H.H. and T.S. are employees of Hitachi Ltd. The other authors declare that there is no conflict of interest associated with this manuscript.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 143 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shimizu, Y., Hanzawa, H., Zhao, Y. et al. Immunoglobulin G (IgG)-Based Imaging Probe Accumulates in M1 Macrophage-Infiltrated Atherosclerotic Plaques Independent of IgG Target Molecule Expression. Mol Imaging Biol 19, 531–539 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-016-1036-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-016-1036-8

Key words

Search

Navigation