Advertisement

Lasers in Medical Science

, Volume 34, Issue 3, pp 615–628 | Cite as

Potentials and pitfalls of gold-silica nanoshell as the exogenous contrast agent for optical diagnosis of cancers: a numerical parametric study

Original Article
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

For nanoshell-assisted optical detection of cancers, gold shell, silica core (gold-silica) nanoshells are engineered to be the exogenous contrast agent. This work has performed systematic numerical parametric study to investigate the nonlinear dependences of the hemisphere diffuse reflectance on gold-silica nanoshells, laser irradiance, and hosting biology tissue. Planar phantom based tissue models have been constructed as platforms for study. The radiant transport equation (RTE) has been applied to mathematically describe the interactions among laser lights, hosting tissues, and hosted nanoshells. The diffuse reflectance signal under various combinations of parametric conditions has been computed and analyzed. Parametric parameters whose effects on the diffuse reflectance signal have been investigated are: (1) optical properties of a nanoshell generic, (2) nanoshell volume fraction, which is an indicator of nanoshell accumulation in the target tissue site, (3) the width of irradiating laser beam, and (4) thickness of the tissue slab. Seven nanoshell generics have been tested as the exogenous contrast agent including the R[50, 10] (radius of silica core is 50 nm and thickness of gold shell is 10 nm), R[55, 25], R[40, 15], R[40, 40], R[104, 23], R[75, 40] and R[154, 24] nanoshells. It has been found the R[55, 25] nanoshell works best as the exogenous contrast agent, the R[75, 40] and R[104, 23] nanoshells show good potentials as well while the R[50, 10] and R[40, 15] nanoshells should be avoided for diagnostic usage. The practice of neglecting the absorption characteristic of the exogenous contrast agent, which is quite common among the bio-nano community, has been proven to end up with an over-prediction of the effectiveness of the exogenous contrast agent. Such practice therefore is not well justified and should be avoided in future research. Interactions among laser lights, the tissue and nanoshells are highly nonlinear, demonstrated by that nanoshell generics with totally different optical properties might have similar effects on the diffuse reflectance signal and vice versa. Prior to any bench experiment, preliminary numerical investigation as this work has showcased is highly recommended.

Keywords

Optical imaging Cancer detection Gold-silica nanoshell Lasers 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Liang C, Sung KB, Richards-Kortum RR, Descour MR (2002) Design of a high-numerical aperture minimature microscope objective for an endoscopic fiber confocal reflectance microscopy. Appl Optics 41(22):4603–4610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sung KB, Liang C, Descour M, Collier T, Follen M, Richards-Kortum R (2002) Fiber-optic confocal reflectance microscope with miniature objective for in vivo imaging of human tissue. IEEE T Biomedi Eng 49(10):1168–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barton JK, Halas NJ, West JL, Drezek RA (2004) Nanoshells as an optical coherence tomography contrast agent. Proc SPIE 5316: 99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tucker-Schwartz JM, Meyer TA, Patil CA, Duvall CL, Skala MC (2012) In vivo photothermal optical coherence tomography of gold nanorod contrast agents. Biomed Opt Express 3(11):2882–2895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kirillin MY, Agrba PD, Sirotkina MA, Shirmanova MV, Zagainova EV, Kamensky VA (2010) Nanoparticles as contrast-enhancing agents in optical coherence tomography imaging of the structural components of skin: quantitative evaluation. Quant Electron 40(6):525–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhou L, Wu G, Wei H, Guo Z, Yang H, He Y, Xie S, Liu Y, Meng Q (2015) Effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles coupled with diode laser on optical properties of in vitro normal and cancerous human lung tissues studied with optical coherence tomography and diffuse reflectance spectra. J Biomed Opt 20(4):046003 (10pp)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhou F, Wei H, Ye X, Hu K, Wu G, Yang H, He Y, Xie S, Guo Z (2015) Influence of nanoparticles accumulation on optical properties of human normal and cancerous liver tissue in vitro estimated by OCT. Phys Med Biol 60:1385–1397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Krainov A, Mokeeva A, Sergeeva E, Zabotnov S, Kirillin M (2013) Nanoparticles as contrasting agents in diffuse optical spectroscopy. Proce SPIE 86990Q(8pp):8699Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang YQ, Wu GY, Wei HJ, Guo ZY, Yang HQ, He YH, Xie SS, Liu Y (2014) Effect of differently sized nanoparticles’ accumulation on the optical properties of ex vivo normal and adenomatous human colon tissue with OCT imaging and diffuse reflectance spectra. Laser Phys Lett 085901(8pp):11Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lin A, Lewinski N, West J, Halas N, Drezek R (2005) Optically tunable nanoparticle contrast agents for early cancer detection: model-based analysis of gold nanoshells. J Biomed Opt 10(6):064035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bayer CL, Kelvekar J, Emelianov SY (2013) Influence of nanosecond pulsed laser irradiance on the viability of nanoparticle-loaded cells: implications for safety of contrast-enhanced photo-acoustic imaging. Nanotechnology 24:465101 (8pp)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fang W, Wei Y (2016) Upconversion nanoparticle as a theranostic agent for tumor imaging and therapy. J Innov Opt Health Sci 9(4):1630006(20pp)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sajjadi AY, Suratkar A, Mitra K, Grace MS (2012) Short-pulse laser-based system for detection of tumors: administration of gold nanoparticles enhances contrast. J Nanotechnology Eng Med 3:021002 (6pp)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hahn MA, Singh AK, Sharma P, Brown SC, Moudgil BM (2011) Nanoparticles as contrast agents for in-vivo bio-imaging: current status and future perspectives. Anal Bioanal Chem 399:3–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bardhan R, Grady NK, Cole JR, Joshi A, Halas NJ (2009) Fluorescene enhancement by Au nanostructures: nanoshells and nanorods. ACS Nano 3(3):744–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zagaynova EV, Shirmanova MV, Kirillin MY, Khlebtsov BN, Orlova AG, Balalaeva IV, Sirotkina MA, Bugrova ML, Agrba PD, Kamensky VA (2008) Contrasting properties of gold nanoparticles for optical coherence tomography: phantom, in vivo studies and Monte Carlo simulation. Phys Med Biol 53:4995–5009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Key J, Leary JF (2014) Nanoparticles for multimodal in vivo imaging in nanomedicine. Int J Nanomed 9:711–726Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shi Y, Fan S, Chen S, Jiang X, Zhao Q, Ren Q, Cui D, Zhou C (2014) OCT imaging enhancement of ovarian cancer using gold and gold/silver nanorods. Proc SPIE 9268:92682Q (7pp)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zeng H, Petek M, Zorman MT, McWilliams A, Palcic B, Lam S (2004) Integrated endoscopy system for simultaneous imaging and spectroscopy for early lung cancer detection. Opt Lett 29(6):587–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Onofre MA, Sopsto MR, Navarro CM (2001) Reliability of toluidine blue application in the detection of oral epithelial dysplasia and in situ and invasive squamous cell carcinomas, Oral Surg, Oral Med. Oral Path Oral Radi 91(5):535–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tincani AJ, Brandalise N, Altemani A, Scanavini RC, Valerio J, Lage HT, Molina G, Martins AS (2000) Diagnosis of superifical esophageal cancer and dysplasia using endoscopic screening with a 2% Lugol dye solution in patients with head and neck cancer. Head Neck 22(2):170–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xu X, Meade A, Bayazitoglu Y (2013) Feasibility of selctive nanoparticle-assisted photothermal treatment for an embedded liver tumor. Lasers Med Sci 28:1159–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Xu X, Meade A, Bayazitoglu Y (2011) Numerical investigation of nanoparticle-assisted laser-induced interstitial thermotherapy, toward tumor and cancer treatment. Lasers Med Sci 26:213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Xu X, Bayazitoglu Y, Meade A (2018) Evaluation of theranostic perspective of gold-silica nanoshell for cancers: a numerical parametric study. Lasers Med Sci under reviewGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vera J, Bayazitoglu Y (2009) Gold nanoshell density variation with laser power for induced hyperthermia. Int J Heat Mass Tran 52:564–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vera J, Bayazitoglu Y (2009) A note on laser penetration in nanoshell deposited tissue. Int J Heat Mass Tran 52(13/14):3402–3406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Eillot AM, Schwartz JS, Wang J, Shetty AM, Bougoyne C, O’Neal D, Hazle J, Stafford RJ (2009) Quantitative comparison of delta P1 versus optical diffusion approximations for modeling near-infrared gold nanoshell heating. Med Phys 36(4):1351–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Feng Y, Fuentes D, Hawkins A, Bass J, Rylander MN, Eillot A, Shetty A, Stafford RJ, Oden JT (2009) Nanoshell-mediated laser surgery simulation for prostate cancer treatment. Eng Comput 25:3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Xu X, Meade A, Bayazitoglu Y (2010) Fluence rate distribution in laser-induced interstitial thermotherapy by meshfree collocation. Int J Heat Mass Tran 53:4017–4022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chai J, Lee H, Patankar S (1994) Finite volume method for radiative heat transfer. J Thermophys Heat Tran 8(3):419–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lin A (2006) Nanoengineered contrast agents for biophotonics: modeling and experimental measurements of gold nanoshell reflectance. Rice University, Ph.D dissertationGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Henyey L, Greenstein J (1941) Diffuse radiation in the galaxy. Astrophys J 93:70–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mie G (1908) Beitrage zur Optik truber Medien, speziell kolloidaler metallosungen. Ann Phys 330:377–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hull E (1998) Nichols MG and Forster TH Quantitative broadband near-infrared spectroscopy of tissue-simulating phantoms containing erythrocytes. Phys Med Biol 43:3381–3404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liu Q, Zhang C, Ramanujam N (2003) Experimental validation of Monte Carlo modeling of fluorescence in tissues in the UV-visible spectrum. J Biomed Opt 8(2):223–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu Q, Ramanujam N (2004) Experimental proof of the feasibility of using an angled fiber-optic probe for depth-sensitive fluorescence spectroscopy of turbid media. Opt Lett 29(17):2034–2036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sokolov K, Drezek R, Gossage K, Richards-Kortum R (1999) Reflectance spectroscopy with polarized light: is it sensitive to cellular and nuclear morphology. Opt Lett 5(13):302–317Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sokolov K, Galvan J, Myakov A, Lacy A, Lotan R, Richards-Kortum R (2002) Realistic three-dimensional epithelial tissue phantoms for biomedical optics. J Biomed Opt 7(1):148–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gossage KW, Smith CM, Kanter EM, Hariri LP, Stone AL, Rodriguez JJ (2006) Williams SK and Barton JK Texture analysis of speckle in optical coherence tomography images of tissue phantoms. Phys Med Biol 51:1563–1575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vishwananth K, Pogue B, Mycek M (2002) Quantitative fluorescence lifetime spectroscopy in turbid media: comparison of theoretical, experimental and computational methods. Phys Med Biol 47:3387–3405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    van Staveren HJ, Moes CJM, van Marle J (1991) Prahl SA and can Gemert MJC Light scattering in intralipid-10% in the wavelength range of 400-1100nm. Appl Opt 30(31):4507–4514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Luadi M, Colombo A, Farina B, Tomatis S, Marchesini R (2001) A phantom with tissue-like optical properties in the visible and near infrared for use on photomedicine. Las Sure Med 28:237–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Germer C, Roggan A, Ritz JP, Isbert C, Albrecht D, Muller G, Buhr H (1998) Optical properties of native and coagulated human liver tissue and liver metastases in the near infrared range. Las Sure Med 23:194–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Toricelli A, Pifferi A, Taroni P, Giambattistelli E, Cubeddu R (2001) In vivo optical characterization of human tissues from 610-1010nm by time-resolved reflectance spectroscopy. Phys Med Biol 46:2227–2237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Doornbos R, Lang R, Aalders M, Cross F, Sterenborg H (1999) The determination of in vivo human tissue optical properties and absolute chromophore concentrations using spatially resolved steady-state diffuse reflectance spectroscopy. Phys Med Biol 44:967–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Welch AJ, Gardner C (2002) Optical and thermal response of tissue to laser radiation. Lasers Med Sci 27-45, edited by Waynant RW, CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ishimaru A (1978) Wave propagation and scattering in random medium. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hornung R, Pham TH, Keefe KA, Berns MW, Tadir Y, Tromberg BJ (1999) Quantitative near-infrared spectroscopy of cervical dysplasia in vivo. Human Reprod 14(11):2908–2916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Matsumura Y, Maeda H (1986) A new concept of macromolecular therapies in cancer chemotherapy: mechanism of tumor tropic accumulation of proteins and the anti-tumor agent SMANCS. Cancer Res 6:6387–6392Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Maeda H, Wu J, Sawa T, Matsumura Y, Hori K (2000) Tumor vascular permeability and the EPR effect in macromolecular therapeutics: a review. J Contr Release 65:271–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Maeda H (2001) The enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) affect in tumor vasculature: the key role of tumor-selective macro- molecular drug targeting. Adv Enzym Regul 41:189–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Maeda H, Fang J, Inutsuka T, Kitamoto Y (2003) Vascular permeability enhancement in solid tumor: various factors, mechanisms involved and its implications. Int Immunopharmacol 3: 319–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Iyer A, Khaled G, Fang J, Maeda H (2006) Exploiting the enhanced permeability and retention effect for tumor targeting. Drug Discov Today 11:812–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical and Electrical EngineeringGuilin University of Electronic TechnologyGuilinPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations