Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Brain Theranostics and Radiotheranostics: Exosomes and Graphenes In Vivo as Novel Brain Theranostics

  • Review
  • Published:
Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Brain disease is one of the greatest threats to public health. Brain theranostics is recently taking shape, indicating the treatments of stroke, inflammatory brain disorders, psychiatric diseases, neurodevelopmental disease, and neurodegenerative disease. However, several factors, such as lack of endophenotype classification, blood-brain barrier (BBB), target determination, ignorance of biodistribution after administration, and complex intercellular communication between brain cells, make brain theranostics application difficult, especially when it comes to clinical application. So, a more thorough understanding of each aspect is needed. In this review, we focus on recent studies regarding the role of exosomes in intercellular communication of brain cells, therapeutic effect of graphene quantum dots, transcriptomics/epitranscriptomics approach for target selection, and in vitro/in vivo considerations.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baingana F, Al'Absi M, Becker AE, Pringle B. Global research challenges and opportunities for mental health and substance-use disorders. Nature. 2015;527:S172–7.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Global Burden of Disease Study C. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 301 acute and chronic diseases and injuries in 188 countries, 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2015;386:743–800.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Organization WH. Depression and other common mental disorders: global health estimates. 2017.

  4. Davidson LL, Grigorenko EL, Boivin MJ, Rapa E, Stein A. A focus on adolescence to reduce neurological, mental health and substance-use disability. Nature. 2015;527:S161–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim CK, Kim T, Choi IY, Soh M, Kim D, Kim YJ, et al. Ceria nanoparticles that can protect against ischemic stroke. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2012;51:11039–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bailey ZS, Nilson E, Bates JA, Oyalowo A, Hockey KS, Sajja V, et al. Cerium oxide nanoparticles improve outcome after in vitro and in vivo mild traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2016.

  7. Kang DW, Kim CK, Jeong HG, Soh M, Kim T, Choi IY, et al. Biocompatible custom ceria nanoparticles against reactive oxygen species resolve acute inflammatory reaction after intracerebral hemorrhage. Nano Res. 2017;10:2743–60.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ghalamfarsa G, Hojjat-Farsangi M, Mohammadnia-Afrouzi M, Anvari E, Farhadi S, Yousefi M, et al. Application of nanomedicine for crossing the blood-brain barrier: theranostic opportunities in multiple sclerosis. J Immunotoxicol. 2016;13:603–19.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Milanesi E, Maj C, Bocchio-Chiavetto L, Maffioletti E. Nanomedicine in psychiatry: new therapeutic opportunities from research on small RNAs. Drug Dev Res. 2016;77:453–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kwon HJ, Kim D, Seo K, Kim YG, Han SI, Kang T, et al. Ceria nanoparticle systems for selective scavenging of mitochondrial, intracellular, and extracellular reactive oxygen species in Parkinson’s disease. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2018.

  11. Hegazy MA, Maklad HM, Samy DM, Abdelmonsif DA, El Sabaa BM, Elnozahy FY. Cerium oxide nanoparticles could ameliorate behavioral and neurochemical impairments in 6-hydroxydopamine induced Parkinson’s disease in rats. Neurochem Int. 2017;108:361–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim D, Yoo JM, Hwang H, Lee J, Lee SH, Yun SP, et al. Graphene quantum dots prevent alpha-synucleinopathy in Parkinson’s disease. Nat Nanotechnol. 2018.

  13. Xiao S, Zhou D, Luan P, Gu B, Feng L, Fan S, et al. Graphene quantum dots conjugated neuroprotective peptide improve learning and memory capability. Biomaterials. 2016;106:98–110.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Allen AJ, Griss ME, Folley BS, Hawkins KA, Pearlson GD. Endophenotypes in schizophrenia: a selective review. Schizophr Res. 2009;109:24–37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. DiLalla LF, McCrary M, Diaz E. A review of endophenotypes in schizophrenia and autism: the next phase for understanding genetic etiologies. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2017;175:354–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sullivan PF. Schizophrenia and the dynamic genome. Genome Med. 2017;9:22.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Insel TR. Brain somatic mutations: the dark matter of psychiatric genetics? Mol Psychiatry. 2014;19:156–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chung J, Wang XL, Maruyama T, Ma YY, Zhang XL, Mez J, et al. Genome-wide association study of Alzheimer’s disease endophenotypes at prediagnosis stages. Alzheimers Dement. 2018;14:623–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Prinz M, Priller J. The role of peripheral immune cells in the CNS in steady state and disease. Nat Neurosci. 2017;20:136–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang Y, Balaji V, Kaniyappan S, Kruger L, Irsen S, Tepper K, et al. The release and trans-synaptic transmission of Tau via exosomes. Mol Neurodegener. 2017;12:5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen CC, Liu L, Ma F, Wong CW, Guo XE, Chacko JV, et al. Elucidation of exosome migration across the blood-brain barrier model in vitro. Cell Mol Bioeng. 2016;9:509–29.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Abbott NJ, Ronnback L, Hansson E. Astrocyte-endothelial interactions at the blood-brain barrier. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7:41–53.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pardridge WM. The blood-brain barrier: bottleneck in brain drug development. NeuroRx. 2005;2:3–14.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Sehlin D, Fang XT, Cato L, Antoni G, Lannfelt L, Syvanen S. Antibody-based PET imaging of amyloid beta in mouse models of Alzheimer’s disease. Nat Commun. 2016;7:10759.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Geldenhuys WJ, Mohammad AS, Adkins CE, Lockman PR. Molecular determinants of blood-brain barrier permeation. Ther Deliv. 2015;6:961–71.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Cummings JL, Morstorf T, Zhong K. Alzheimer's disease drug-development pipeline: few candidates, frequent failures. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2014;6:37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Lemere CA. Immunotherapy for Alzheimer’s disease: hoops and hurdles. Mol Neurodegener. 2013;8:36.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. van Dyck CH. Anti-amyloid-beta monoclonal antibodies for Alzheimer’s disease: pitfalls and promise. Biol Psychiatry. 2018;83:311–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bang S, Lee SR, Ko J, Son K, Tahk D, Ahn J, et al. A low permeability microfluidic blood-brain barrier platform with direct contact between perfusable vascular network and astrocytes. Sci Rep. 2017;7.

  30. Wang JD, Khafagy E, Khanafer K, Takayama S, Elsayed MEH. Organization of endothelial cells, pericytes, and astrocytes into a 3D microfluidic in vitro model of the blood-brain barrier. Mol Pharm. 2016;13:895–906.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kim JA, Kim HN, Im SK, Chung S, Kang JY, Choi N. Collagen-based brain microvasculature model in vitro using three-dimensional printed template. Biomicrofluidics. 2015;9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Ecker GF, Noe CR. In silico prediction models for blood-brain barrier permeation. Curr Med Chem. 2004;11:1617–28.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mitchell JB. Machine learning methods in chemoinformatics. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Mol Sci. 2014;4:468–81.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Bicker J, Alves G, Fortuna A, Falcao A. Blood-brain barrier models and their relevance for a successful development of CNS drug delivery systems: a review. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2014;87:409–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Coman H, Nemes B. New therapeutic targets in Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Gerontol. 2017;11:2–6.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Mangialasche F, Solomon A, Winblad B, Mecocci P, Kivipelto M. Alzheimer’s disease: clinical trials and drug development. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9:702–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Clark CM, Schneider JA, Bedell BJ, Beach TG, Bilker WB, Mintun MA, et al. Use of Florbetapir-PET for imaging beta-amyloid pathology. JAMA. 2011;305:275–83.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Nordberg A. PET imaging of amyloid in Alzheimer’s disease. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3:519–27.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sabri O, Sabbagh MN, Seibyl J, Barthel H, Akatsu H, Ouchi Y, et al. Florbetaben PET imaging to detect amyloid beta plaques in Alzheimer’s disease: phase 3 study. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11:964–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hanger DP, Lau DH, Phillips EC, Bondulich MK, Guo T, Woodward BW, et al. Intracellular and extracellular roles for tau in neurodegenerative disease. J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;40(Suppl 1):S37–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Scholl M, Lockhart SN, Schonhaut DR, O'Neil JP, Janabi M, Ossenkoppele R, et al. PET imaging of tau deposition in the aging human brain. Neuron. 2016;89:971–82.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Brendel M, Yousefi BH, Blume T, Herz M, Focke C, Deussing M, et al. Comparison of (18)F-T807 and (18)F-THK5117 PET in a mouse model of tau pathology. Front Aging Neurosci. 2018;10:174.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Harada R, Okamura N, Furumoto S, Furukawa K, Ishiki A, Tomita N, et al. 18F-THK5351: a novel PET radiotracer for imaging neurofibrillary pathology in Alzheimer disease. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:208–14.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Okamura N, Furumoto S, Harada R, Tago T, Yoshikawa T, Fodero-Tavoletti M, et al. Novel 18F-labeled arylquinoline derivatives for noninvasive imaging of tau pathology in Alzheimer disease. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1420–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Maruyama M, Shimada H, Suhara T, Shinotoh H, Ji B, Maeda J, et al. Imaging of tau pathology in a tauopathy mouse model and in Alzheimer patients compared to normal controls. Neuron. 2013;79:1094–108.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Santos R, Ursu O, Gaulton A, Bento AP, Donadi RS, Bologa CG, et al. A comprehensive map of molecular drug targets. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16:19–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Venneti S, Lopresti BJ, Wiley CA. The peripheral benzodiazepine receptor (translocator protein 18kDa) in microglia: from pathology to imaging. Prog Neurobiol. 2006;80:308–22.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Choi J, Ifuku M, Noda M, Guilarte TR. Translocator protein (18 kDa)/peripheral benzodiazepine receptor specific ligands induce microglia functions consistent with an activated state. Glia. 2011;59:219–30.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Prante O, Maschauer S, Banerjee A. Radioligands for the dopamine receptor subtypes. J Labelled Comp Radiopharm. 2013;56:130–48.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Liu GJ, Middleton RJ, Hatty CR, Kam WW, Chan R, Pham T, et al. The 18 kDa translocator protein, microglia and neuroinflammation. Brain Pathol. 2014;24:631–53.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Kaasinen V, Vahlberg T. Striatal dopamine in Parkinson disease: a meta-analysis of imaging studies. Ann Neurol. 2017;82:873–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Tatsch K, Poepperl G. Nigrostriatal dopamine terminal imaging with dopamine transporter SPECT: an update. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1331–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Poulin JF, Tasic B, Hjerling-Leffler J, Trimarchi JM, Awatramani R. Disentangling neural cell diversity using single-cell transcriptomics. Nat Neurosci. 2016;19:1131–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Rosenberg AB, Roco CM, Muscat RA, Kuchina A, Sample P, Yao Z, et al. Single-cell profiling of the developing mouse brain and spinal cord with split-pool barcoding. Science. 2018;360:176–82.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Mayer C, Hafemeister C, Bandler RC, Machold R, Batista Brito R, Jaglin X, et al. Developmental diversification of cortical inhibitory interneurons. Nature. 2018;555:457–62.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Nowakowski TJ, Bhaduri A, Pollen AA, Alvarado B, Mostajo-Radji MA, Di Lullo E, et al. Spatiotemporal gene expression trajectories reveal developmental hierarchies of the human cortex. Science. 2017;358:1318–23.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Park J, Shrestha R, Qiu C, Kondo A, Huang S, Werth M, et al. Single-cell transcriptomics of the mouse kidney reveals potential cellular targets of kidney disease. Science. 2018;360:758–63.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Willmann JK, van Bruggen N, Dinkelborg LM, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging in drug development. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2008;7:591–607.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Alavijeh MS, Chishty M, Qaiser MZ, Palmer AM. Drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, the blood-brain barrier, and central nervous system drug discovery. NeuroRx. 2005;2:554–71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Lee DS. Radionanomedicine. Springer Internatioenal Publishing 2018.

  61. Lee YS, Kim YI, Lee DS. Future perspectives of radionanomedicine using the novel micelle-encapsulation method for surface modification. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;49:170–3.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Lee DS, Im HJ, Lee YS. Radionanomedicine: widened perspectives of molecular theragnosis. Nanomedicine. 2015;11:795–810.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Sun G, Xu J, Hagooly A, Rossin R, Li Z, Moore DA, et al. Strategies for optimized radiolabeling of nanoparticles for in vivo PET imaging. Adv Mater. 2007;19:3157–62.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Yang LK, Sundaresan G, Sun MH, Jose P, Hoffman D, McDonagh PR, et al. Intrinsically radiolabeled multifunctional cerium oxide nanoparticles for in vivo studies. J Mater Chem B. 2013;1:1421–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Lee DS, Suh M, Lee YS. Radiolabeling method: core/surface labeling, chemical and physical labeling. Radionanomedicine. Springer International Publishing; 2018.

  66. Chen D, Hong H. Surface modification of radionanomedicine. Radionanomedicine. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Lee YK, Jeong JM, Hoigebazar L, Yang BY, Lee YS, Lee BC, et al. Nanoparticles modified by encapsulation of ligands with a long alkyl chain to affect multispecific and multimodal imaging. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1462–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. van Dongen GA, Visser GW, Lub-de Hooge MN, de Vries EG, Perk LR. Immuno-PET: a navigator in monoclonal antibody development and applications. Oncologist. 2007;12:1379–89.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Rijpkema M, Boerman OC, Oyen WJG. Tumor targeting using radiolabeled antibodies for image-guided drug delivery. Curr Drug Targets. 2015;16:625–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Perkins AC, Frier M. Radionuclide imaging in drug development. Curr Pharm Des. 2004;10:2907–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Varnas K, Varrone A, Farde L. Modeling of PET data in CNS drug discovery and development. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2013;40:267–79.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Bartlett DW, Su H, Hildebrandt IJ, Weber WA, Davis ME. Impact of tumor-specific targeting on the biodistribution and efficacy of siRNA nanoparticles measured by multimodality in vivo imaging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:15549–54.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Higuchi M, Maeda J, Ji B, Maruyama M, Okauchi T, Tokunaga M, et al. In-vivo visualization of key molecular processes involved in Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis: insights from neuroimaging research in humans and rodent models. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1802;2010:373–88.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Shi SJ. Biologics: an update and challenge of their pharmacokinetics. Curr Drug Metab. 2014;15:271–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Wang W, Wang EQ, Balthasar JP. Monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;84:548–58.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Wang J, Iyer S, Fielder PJ, Davis JD, Deng R. Projecting human pharmacokinetics of monoclonal antibodies from nonclinical data: comparative evaluation of prediction approaches in early drug development. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 2016;37:51–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Mager DE, Woo S, Jusko WJ. Scaling pharmacodynamics from in vitro and preclinical animal studies to humans. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2009;24:16–24.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Shaham S. Glia-neuron interactions in nervous system function and development. Curr Top Dev Biol. 2005;69:39–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Banks WA. From blood-brain barrier to blood-brain interface: new opportunities for CNS drug delivery. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2016;15:275–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Iba M, Guo JL, McBride JD, Zhang B, Trojanowski JQ, Lee VM. Synthetic tau fibrils mediate transmission of neurofibrillary tangles in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer’s-like tauopathy. J Neurosci. 2013;33:1024–37.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Trotta T, Panaro MA, Cianciulli A, Mori G, Di Benedetto A, Porro C. Microglia-derived extracellular vesicles in Alzheimer's disease: a double-edged sword. Biochem Pharmacol. 2018;148:184–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Asai H, Ikezu S, Tsunoda S, Medalla M, Luebke J, Haydar T, et al. Depletion of microglia and inhibition of exosome synthesis halt tau propagation. Nat Neurosci. 2015;18:1584–93.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Xiao TT, Zhang WW, Jiao B, Pan CZ, Liu XX, Shen L. The role of exosomes in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’ disease. Transl Neurodegener. 2017;6.

  84. Kamerkar S, LeBleu VS, Sugimoto H, Yang S, Ruivo CF, Melo SA, et al. Exosomes facilitate therapeutic targeting of oncogenic KRAS in pancreatic cancer. Nature. 2017;546:498–503.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Sarko DK, McKinney CE. Exosomes: origins and therapeutic potential for neurodegenerative disease. Front Neurosci. 2017;11:82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Neuwelt E, Abbott N, Abrey L, Banks WA, Blakley B, Davis T, et al. Strategies to advance translational research into brain barriers. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:84–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Abbott NJ, Patabendige AA, Dolman DE, Yusof SR, Begley DJ. Structure and function of the blood-brain barrier. Neurobiol Dis. 2010;37:13–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Griep LM, Wolbers F, de Wagenaar B, ter Braak PM, Weksler BB, Romero IA, et al. BBB on chip: microfluidic platform to mechanically and biochemically modulate blood-brain barrier function. Biomed Microdevices. 2013;15:145–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Shin Y, Yang K, Han S, Park HJ, Seok Heo Y, Cho SW, et al. Reconstituting vascular microenvironment of neural stem cell niche in three-dimensional extracellular matrix. Adv Healthc Mater. 2014;3:1457–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Han S, Yang K, Shin Y, Lee JS, Kamm RD, Chung S, et al. Three-dimensional extracellular matrix-mediated neural stem cell differentiation in a microfluidic device. Lab Chip. 2012;12:2305–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Shin Y, Han S, Jeon JS, Yamamoto K, Zervantonakis IK, Sudo R, et al. Microfluidic assay for simultaneous culture of multiple cell types on surfaces or within hydrogels. Nat Protoc. 2012;7:1247–59.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Oh HJ, Shin Y, Chung S, Hwang DW, Lee DS. Convective exosome-tracing microfluidics for analysis of cell-non-autonomous neurogenesis. Biomaterials. 2017;112:82–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Lee C, Hwang DW, Gho YS. Endogenous radionanomedicine: extracellular vesicles. Radionanomedicine. Springer International Publishing 2018.

  94. Lopez-Verrilli MA, Picou F, Court FA. Schwann cell-derived exosomes enhance axonal regeneration in the peripheral nervous system. Glia. 2013;61:1795–806.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Zhang Y, Chopp M, Meng Y, Katakowski M, Xin H, Mahmood A, et al. Effect of exosomes derived from multipluripotent mesenchymal stromal cells on functional recovery and neurovascular plasticity in rats after traumatic brain injury. J Neurosurg. 2015;122:856–67.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Hoshino A, Costa-Silva B, Shen TL, Rodrigues G, Hashimoto A, Tesic Mark M, et al. Tumour exosome integrins determine organotropic metastasis. Nature. 2015;527:329–35.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  97. Tkach M, Kowal J, Thery C. Why the need and how to approach the functional diversity of extracellular vesicles. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci. 2018;372.

  98. van Niel G, D'Angelo G, Raposo G. Shedding light on the cell biology of extracellular vesicles. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2018;19:213–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Zeng F, Morelli AE. Extracellular vesicle-mediated MHC cross-dressing in immune homeostasis, transplantation, infectious diseases, and cancer. Semin Immunopathol. 2018.

  100. Synowsky SA, Shirran SL, Cooke FGM, Antoniou AN, Botting CH, Powis SJ. The major histocompatibility complex class I immunopeptidome of extracellular vesicles. J Biol Chem. 2017;292:17084–92.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Morishita M, Takahashi Y, Nishikawa M, Takakura Y. Pharmacokinetics of exosomes-an important factor for elucidating the biological roles of exosomes and for the development of exosome-based therapeutics. J Pharm Sci. 2017;106:2265–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Lai CP, Kim EY, Badr CE, Weissleder R, Mempel TR, Tannous BA, et al. Visualization and tracking of tumour extracellular vesicle delivery and RNA translation using multiplexed reporters. Nat Commun. 2015;6.

  103. Choi H, Lee DS. Illuminating the physiology of extracellular vesicles. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2016;7:55.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  104. Hwang DW, Choi H, Jang SC, Yoo MY, Park JY, Choi NE, et al. Noninvasive imaging of radiolabeled exosome-mimetic nanovesicle using (99m)Tc-HMPAO. Sci Rep. 2015;5:15636.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  105. Salter MW, Stevens B. Microglia emerge as central players in brain disease. Nat Med. 2017;23:1018–27.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Saraiva C, Praca C, Ferreira R, Santos T, Ferreira L, Bernardino L. Nanoparticle-mediated brain drug delivery: overcoming blood-brain barrier to treat neurodegenerative diseases. J Control Release. 2016;235:34–47.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Nichols JW, Bae YH. Odyssey of a cancer nanoparticle: from injection site to site of action. Nano Today. 2012;7:606–18.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  108. Cho K, Wang X, Nie S, Chen ZG, Shin DM. Therapeutic nanoparticles for drug delivery in cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:1310–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Gilleron J, Querbes W, Zeigerer A, Borodovsky A, Marsico G, Schubert U, et al. Image-based analysis of lipid nanoparticle-mediated siRNA delivery, intracellular trafficking and endosomal escape. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:638–46.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Jackson AL, Linsley PS. Recognizing and avoiding siRNA off-target effects for target identification and therapeutic application. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010;9:57–67.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Kleinman ME, Yamada K, Takeda A, Chandrasekaran V, Nozaki M, Baffi JZ, et al. Sequence- and target-independent angiogenesis suppression by siRNA via TLR3. Nature. 2008;452:591–7.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Gupta AK, Gupta M. Synthesis and surface engineering of iron oxide nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Biomaterials. 2005;26:3995–4021.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Yang BY, Moon SH, Seelam SR, Jeon MJ, Lee YS, Lee DS, et al. Development of a multimodal imaging probe by encapsulating iron oxide nanoparticles with functionalized amphiphiles for lymph node imaging. Nanomedicine (Lond). 2015;10:1899–910.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Chen F, Bu W, Cai W, Shi J. Functionalized upconversion nanoparticles: versatile nanoplatforms for translational research. Curr Mol Med. 2013;13:1613–32.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  115. Seo HJ, Nam SH, Im HJ, Park JY, Lee JY, Yoo B, et al. Rapid hepatobiliary excretion of micelle-encapsulated/radiolabeled upconverting nanoparticles as an integrated form. Sci Rep. 2015;5.

  116. Allen TM, Cullis PR. Liposomal drug delivery systems: from concept to clinical applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2013;65:36–48.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Liu JQ, Cui L, Losic D. Graphene and graphene oxide as new nanocarriers for drug delivery applications. Acta Biomater. 2013;9:9243–57.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Yoo JM, Hwang DW, Hong BH. Graphene-based nanomaterials. Radionanomedicine: Springer International Publishing; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Mukherjee SP, Bottini M, Fadeel B. Graphene and the immune system: a romance of many dimensions. Front Immunol. 2017;8:673.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  120. Mukherjee SP, Gliga AR, Lazzaretto B, Brandner B, Fielden M, Vogt C, et al. Graphene oxide is degraded by neutrophils and the degradation products are non-genotoxic. Nanoscale. 2018;10:1180–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Sun HJ, Wu L, Wei WL, Qu XG. Recent advances in graphene quantum dots for sensing. Mater Today. 2013;16:433–42.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Iannazzo D, Pistone A, Salamo M, Galvagno S, Romeo R, Giofre SV, et al. Graphene quantum dots for cancer targeted drug delivery. Int J Pharm. 2017;518:185–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Zheng XT, Ananthanarayanan A, Luo KQ, Chen P. Glowing graphene quantum dots and carbon dots: properties, syntheses, and biological applications. Small. 2015;11:1620–36.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Liu YB, Xu LP, Dai WH, Dong HF, Wen YQ, Zhang XJ. Graphene quantum dots for the inhibition of beta amyloid aggregation. Nanoscale. 2015;7:19060–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Kim HY, Kim HV, Jo S, Lee CJ, Choi SY, Kim DJ, et al. EPPS rescues hippocampus-dependent cognitive deficits in APP/PS1 mice by disaggregation of amyloid-beta oligomers and plaques. Nat Commun. 2015;6:8997.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Keren-Shaul H, Spinrad A, Weiner A, Matcovitch-Natan O, Dvir-Szternfeld R, Ulland TK, et al. A unique microglia type associated with restricting development of Alzheimer’s disease. Cell. 2017;169:1276–90.e17.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Deczkowska A, Keren-Shaul H, Weiner A, Colonna M, Schwartz M, Amit I. Disease-associated microglia: a universal immune sensor of neurodegeneration. Cell. 2018;173:1073–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Wendeln AC, Degenhardt K, Kaurani L, Gertig M, Ulas T, Jain G, et al. Innate immune memory in the brain shapes neurological disease hallmarks. Nature. 2018;556:332–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  129. Chen GY, Yang HJ, Lu CH, Chao YC, Hwang SM, Chen CL, et al. Simultaneous induction of autophagy and toll-like receptor signaling pathways by graphene oxide. Biomaterials. 2012;33:6559–69.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Ma J, Liu R, Wang X, Liu Q, Chen Y, Valle RP, et al. Crucial role of lateral size for graphene oxide in activating macrophages and stimulating pro-inflammatory responses in cells and animals. ACS Nano. 2015;9:10498–515.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  131. Zhou HJ, Zhao K, Li W, Yang N, Liu Y, Chen CY, et al. The interactions between pristine graphene and macrophages and the production of cytokines/chemokines via TLR- and NF-kappa B-related signaling pathways. Biomaterials. 2012;33:6933–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Li Y, Boraschi D. Endotoxin contamination: a key element in the interpretation of nanosafety studies. Nanomedicine (Lond). 2016;11:269–87.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Mukherjee SP, Lozano N, Kucki M, Del Rio-Castillo AE, Newman L, Vazquez E, et al. Detection of endotoxin contamination of graphene based materials using the TNF-alpha expression test and guidelines for endotoxin-free graphene oxide production. PLoS One. 2016;11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. Diez-Orejas R, Feito MJ, Cicuendez M, Rojo JM, Portoles MT. Differential effects of graphene oxide nanosheets on Candida albicans phagocytosis by murine peritoneal macrophages. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2018;512:665–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Hwang DW. Radio-graphene in theranostic perspectives. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;51:17–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Lee DS, Shin YK. Innate immunity to nanomaterials. Radionanomedicine. Springer International Publishing 2018.

  137. Wilhelm S, Tavares AJ, Dai Q, Ohta S, Audet J, Dvorak HF, et al. Analysis of nanoparticle delivery to tumours. Nat Rev Mater. 2016;1.

  138. Albanese A, Tang PS, Chan WC. The effect of nanoparticle size, shape, and surface chemistry on biological systems. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2012;14:1–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Shi S, Xu C, Yang K, Goel S, Valdovinos HF, Luo H, et al. Chelator-free radiolabeling of nanographene: breaking the stereotype of chelation. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2017;56:2889–92.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  140. Hong H, Zhang Y, Engle JW, Nayak TR, Theuer CP, Nickles RJ, et al. In vivo targeting and positron emission tomography imaging of tumor vasculature with (66)Ga-labeled nano-graphene. Biomaterials. 2012;33:4147–56.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  141. Yang K, Feng L, Hong H, Cai W, Liu Z. Preparation and functionalization of graphene nanocomposites for biomedical applications. Nat Protoc. 2013;8:2392–403.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Du XG, Wang XY, Geng MY. Alzheimer’s disease hypothesis and related therapies. Transl Neurodegener. 2018;7.

  143. Herrup K. The case for rejecting the amyloid cascade hypothesis. Nat Neurosci. 2015;18:794–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Klein AM, Mazutis L, Akartuna I, Tallapragada N, Veres A, Li V, et al. Droplet barcoding for single-cell transcriptomics applied to embryonic stem cells. Cell. 2015;161:1187–201.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  145. Macosko EZ, Basu A, Satija R, Nemesh J, Shekhar K, Goldman M, et al. Highly parallel genome-wide expression profiling of individual cells using nanoliter droplets. Cell. 2015;161:1202–14.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  146. Petukhov V, Guo J, Baryawno N, Severe N, Scadden DT, Samsonova MG, et al. DropEst: pipeline for accurate estimation of molecular counts in droplet-based single-cell RNA-seq experiments. Genome Biol. 2018;19:78.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  147. Villani AC, Satija R, Reynolds G, Sarkizova S, Shekhar K, Fletcher J, et al. Single-cell RNA-seq reveals new types of human blood dendritic cells, monocytes, and progenitors. Science. 2017;356.

  148. Azizi E, Carr AJ, Plitas G, Cornish AE, Konopacki C, Prabhakaran S. et al., Single-cell map of diverse immune phenotypes in the breast tumor microenvironment. Cell. 2018.

  149. Trapnell C, Cacchiarelli D, Grimsby J, Pokharel P, Li S, Morse M, et al. The dynamics and regulators of cell fate decisions are revealed by pseudotemporal ordering of single cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32:381–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  150. Satija R, Farrell JA, Gennert D, Schier AF, Regev A. Spatial reconstruction of single-cell gene expression data. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:495–502.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  151. Rizvi AH, Camara PG, Kandror EK, Roberts TJ, Schieren I, Maniatis T, et al. Single-cell topological RNA-seq analysis reveals insights into cellular differentiation and development. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;35:551–60.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  152. Darmanis S, Sloan SA, Zhang Y, Enge M, Caneda C, Shuer LM, et al. A survey of human brain transcriptome diversity at the single cell level. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112:7285–90.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  153. Zeisel A, Munoz-Manchado AB, Codeluppi S, Lonnerberg P, La Manno G, Jureus A, et al. Brain structure. Cell types in the mouse cortex and hippocampus revealed by single-cell RNA-seq. Science. 2015;347:1138–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  154. Dulken BW, Leeman DS, Boutet SC, Hebestreit K, Brunet A. Single-cell transcriptomic analysis defines heterogeneity and transcriptional dynamics in the adult neural stem cell lineage. Cell Rep. 2017;18:777–90.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  155. Mortazavi A, Williams BA, McCue K, Schaeffer L, Wold B. Mapping and quantifying mammalian transcriptomes by RNA-Seq. Nat Methods. 2008;5:621–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  156. Friedman BA, Srinivasan K, Ayalon G, Meilandt WJ, Lin H, Huntley MA, et al. Diverse brain myeloid expression profiles reveal distinct microglial activation states and aspects of Alzheimer’s disease not evident in mouse models. Cell Rep. 2018;22:832–47.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Ben Haim L, Rowitch DH. Functional diversity of astrocytes in neural circuit regulation. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2017;18:31–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  158. Kim DH, Marinov GK, Pepke S, Singer ZS, He P, Williams B, et al. Single-cell transcriptome analysis reveals dynamic changes in lncRNA expression during reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell. 2015;16:88–101.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  159. Kopp F, Mendell JT. Functional classification and experimental dissection of long noncoding RNAs. Cell. 2018;172:393–407.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  160. Meyer KD, Jaffrey SR. The dynamic epitranscriptome: N6-methyladenosine and gene expression control. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2014;15:313–26.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  161. Mercer TR, Dinger ME, Sunkin SM, Mehler MF, Mattick JS. Specific expression of long noncoding RNAs in the mouse brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105:716–21.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  162. Mattick JS. The central role of RNA in human development and cognition. FEBS Lett. 2011;585:1600–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. Derrien T, Johnson R, Bussotti G, Tanzer A, Djebali S, Tilgner H, et al. The GENCODE v7 catalog of human long noncoding RNAs: analysis of their gene structure, evolution, and expression. Genome Res. 2012;22:1775–89.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  164. GENCODE, v28. 2017. https://www.gencodegenes.org/stats/current.html.

  165. Qureshi IA, Mattick JS, Mehler MF. Long non-coding RNAs in nervous system function and disease. Brain Res. 2010;1338:20–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  166. Liu N, Pan T. RNA epigenetics. Transl Res. 2015;165:28–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  167. Liu N, Pan T. N6-methyladenosine-encoded epitranscriptomics. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2016;23:98–102.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Lein E, Borm LE, Linnarsson S. The promise of spatial transcriptomics for neuroscience in the era of molecular cell typing. Science. 2017;358:64–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. ABI. Allen brain institute cell types webpage. 2017. http://celltypes.brain-map.org.

  170. Grillner S, Ip N, Koch C, Koroshetz W, Okano H, Polachek M, et al. Worldwide initiatives to advance brain research. Nat Neurosci. 2016;19:1118–22.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  171. Litjens G, Kooi T, Bejnordi BE, Setio AAA, Ciompi F, Ghafoorian M, et al. A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med Image Anal. 2017;42:60–88.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  172. Min S, Lee B, Yoon S. Deep learning in bioinformatics. Brief Bioinform. 2017;18:851–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  173. Wang H, Raj B. On the origin of deep learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:170207800. 2017.

  174. Kingma DP, Welling M. Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:13126114. 2013.

  175. Goodfellow I, Pouget-Abadie J, Mirza M, Xu B, Warde-Farley D, Ozair S et al., editors. Generative adversarial nets. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2014.

  176. Santoro A, Raposo D, Barrett DG, Malinowski M, Pascanu R, Battaglia P et al., editors. A simple neural network module for relational reasoning. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2017.

  177. Eslami SMA, Jimenez Rezende D, Besse F, Viola F, Morcos AS, Garnelo M, et al. Neural scene representation and rendering. Science. 2018;360:1204–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  178. Duyckaerts C, Potier MC, Delatour B. Alzheimer disease models and human neuropathology: similarities and differences. Acta Neuropathol. 2008;115:5–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  179. McGowan E, Eriksen J, Hutton M. A decade of modeling Alzheimer’s disease in transgenic mice. Trends Genet. 2006;22:281–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  180. van den Bergh FS, Bloemarts E, Chan JS, Groenink L, Olivier B, Oosting RS. Spontaneously hypertensive rats do not predict symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2006;83:380–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  181. Meneses A, Perez-Garcia G, Ponce-Lopez T, Tellez R, Gallegos-Cari A, Castillo C. Spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) as an animal model for ADHD: a short overview. Rev Neurosci. 2011;22:365–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  182. Briggs JA, Wolvetang EJ, Mattick JS, Rinn JL, Barry G. Mechanisms of long non-coding RNAs in mammalian nervous system development, plasticity, disease, and evolution. Neuron. 2015;88:861–77.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  183. Sambandan S, Akbalik G, Kochen L, Rinne J, Kahlstatt J, Glock C, et al. Activity-dependent spatially localized miRNA maturation in neuronal dendrites. Science. 2017;355:634–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea

    Minseok Suh & Dong Soo Lee

  2. Department of Molecular Medicine and Biopharmaceutical Sciences, Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea

    Minseok Suh & Dong Soo Lee

Authors
  1. Minseok Suh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dong Soo Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dong Soo Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Dong Soo Lee and Minseok Suh declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

As a review article, obtaining informed consent was waived.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Suh, M., Lee, D.S. Brain Theranostics and Radiotheranostics: Exosomes and Graphenes In Vivo as Novel Brain Theranostics. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 52, 407–419 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-018-0550-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-018-0550-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation