Advertisement

31P-MRS Studies of Melanoma Xenografts with Different Metastatic Potential

  • Lin Z. LiEmail author
  • Rong Zhou
  • Dennis B. Leeper
  • Jerry D. Glickson
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 701)

Abstract

Previously we reported that three imaging methods, dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI), T1ρ-MRI, and ultralow temperature NADH/flavoprotein fluorescence imaging (redox scanning), could differentiate the less metastatic human melanoma cell line A375P from a more metastatic line C8161 growing as mouse xenografts in nude mice (Li LZ et al. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol., 2007, 599:67-78; PNAS, 2009, 106:6608-6613). The more metastatic C8161 tumor was characterized by less blood perfusion/permeability, a more oxidized mitochondrial redox state in the tumor core, and a smaller T1ρ relaxation time constant averaged across the entire tumor section. In the current study, we have further probed the bioenergetic status and tissue microenvironment of these tumors by applying whole tumor phosphorous magnetic resonance spectroscopy (31P-MRS) to these two xenografts in a vertical bore 9.4-T Varian magnet. The phosphomonoester (PME)/βNTP ratio and intracellular pH value (pHi) were determined. The phosphomonoester (PME)/βNTP was higher in the more metastatic C8161 tumors (n=4) than in the less metastatic A375P tumors (n=4) (p < 0.1). No significant difference between the pHi of C8161 and A375P was observed.

Keywords

Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Human Melanoma Cell Line C8161 Tumor Metastatic Melanoma Cell Line Bioenergetic Status 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Li, L.Z., et al Predicting melanoma metastatic potential by optical and magnetic resonance imaging. Adv Exp Med Biol, 2007. 599: p. 67-78.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li, L.Z., et al Quantitative magnetic resonance and optical imaging biomarkers of melanoma metastatic potential. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009. 106(16): p. 6608-6613.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rofstad, E.K. Microenvironment-induced cancer metastasis. Int J Radiat Biol, 2000. 76(5): p. 589-605.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Subarsky, P. and R.P. Hill The hypoxic tumour microenvironment and metastatic progression. Clin Exp Metastasis, 2003. 20(3): p. 237-250.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gillies, R.J., et al MRI of the tumor microenvironment. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2002. 16(4): p. 430-450.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vaupel, P. and A. Mayer Hypoxia in cancer: significance and impact on clinical outcome. Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, 2007. 26(2): p. 225-239.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dewhirst, M.W., et al Relation between pO(2), P-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy parameters and treatment outcome in patients with high-grade soft tissue sarcomas treated with thermoradiotherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 2005. 61(2): p. 480-491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bhujwalla, Z.M., et al Estimations of intra- and extracellular volume and pH by P-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy: effect of therapy on RIF-1 tumours. British Journal of Cancer, 1998. 78(5): p. 606-611.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou, R., et al Intracellular acidification of human melanoma xenografts by the respiratory inhibitor m-iodobenzylguanidine plus hyperglycemia: A P-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy study. Cancer Research, 2000. 60(13): p. 3532-3536.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shukla-Dave, A., et al Prediction of treatment response of head and neck cancers with P-31 MR spectroscopy from pretreatment relative phosphomonoester levels. Academic Radiology, 2002. 9(6): p. 688-694.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Arias-Mendoza, F., M.R. Smith, and T.R. Brown, Predicting treatment response in non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma from the pretreatment tumor content of phosphoethanolamine plus phosphocholine. Academic Radiology, 2004. 11(4): p. 368-376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gatenby, R.A. and R.J. Gillies Why do cancers have high aerobic glycolysis? Nature Reviews Cancer, 2004. 4(11): p. 891-899.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gatenby, R.A., et al Acid-mediated tumor invasion: a multidisciplinary study. Cancer Research, 2006. 66(10): p. 5216-5223.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gillies, R.J., et al PH imaging. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 2004. 23(5): p. 57-64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lin Z. Li
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rong Zhou
    • 1
  • Dennis B. Leeper
    • 2
  • Jerry D. Glickson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology, School of MedicineUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiation Oncology, School of MedicineThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations