Advertisement

Use of Acoustically Active Contrast Agents in Imaging of Inflammation and Atherosclerosis

  • Patrick H. Kee
  • David D. McPherson
Part of the Fundamental Biomedical Technologies book series (FBMT, volume 102)

Abstract

Inflammation plays an important role in the development of atherosclerosis. The endothelium is an active organ that forms a barrier between the circulation and the arterial wall. In response to pro-atherogenic factors, the endothelium is induced to become an adhesive and pro-thrombotic surface. A range of molecular markers associated with early and late changes in atherogenesis have been identified in the endothelium. Those pathological changes in the endothelium are potential targets for early detection of atherosclerosis and may precede advanced changes that can be detected by conventional imaging modalities, such as coronary angiography. Acoustically active contrast agents have been widely used for clinical applications such as enhancing cardiac chamber definition and measuring myocardial perfusion in diagnostic ultrasound imaging. In the context of molecular imaging, those agents are pure intravascular tracers and are ideally suited for interrogating the expression of molecular markers on the endothelium. Studies have demonstrated how microbubbles can detect inflammation by means of the interactions between their lipid shell components and leukocytes that co-localize on the surface of inflamed endothelium. More sophisticated acoustically active targeting agents, however, involve the incorporation of high-affinity peptides or antibodies into their lipid shell that highlight inflammatory markers, thrombosis, and neovascularization in the arterial wall in atherosclerotic animal models. Before those agents can be widely used in clinical practice, they will require further refinements to reduce immunogenicity of targeting ligands, minimize toxicity of lipid shell components, and improve acoustic stability after intravenous administration. The most challenging aspect of this research is, however, the identification of clinically relevant markers that can accurately predict the presence and progression of atherosclerosis.

Keywords

Contrast Agent Intravascular Ultrasound Ultrasound Contrast Agent Acoustic Reflectivity Perfluorocarbon Emulsion 
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. Alkan-Onyuksel, H., Demos, S. M., et al., 1996. Development of inherently echogenic liposomes as an ultrasonic contrast agent. J Pharm Sci 85,5, 486–490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barker, S.G., Talbert, A., et al., 1993. Arterial intimal hyperplasia after occlusion of the adventitial vasa vasorum in the pig. Arterioscler Thromb 13,1, 70–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Basalyga, D.M., Wagner, W.R., et al., 1998. Albumin microbubbles adhere to exposed extracellular matrix of perfused whole vessels. Circulation 98, I-290.Google Scholar
  4. Booth, R.F., Martin, J.F., et al., 1989. Rapid development of atherosclerotic lesions in the rabbit carotid artery induced by perivascular manipulation. Atherosclerosis 76,2–3, 257–268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bredehorst, R., Ligler, F.S., et al., 1986. Effect of covalent attachment of immunoglobulin fragments on liposomal integrity. Biochemistry 25,19, 5693–5698.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, M., Masaki, T., et al., 2002. LOX-1, the receptor for oxidized low-density lipoprotein identified from endothelial cells: implications in endothelial dysfunction and atherosclerosis. Pharmacol Ther 95,1, 89–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cybulsky, M.I., Gimbrone, M.A., Jr., 1991. Endothelial expression of a mononuclear leukocyte adhesion molecule during atherogenesis. Science 251,4995, 788–791.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Demos, S.M., Alkan-Onyuksel, H., et al., 1999. In vivo targeting of acoustically reflective liposomes for intravascular and transvascular ultrasonic enhancement. J Am Coll Cardiol 33,3, 867–875.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Demos, S.M., Dagar, S., et al., 1998. In vitro targeting of acoustically reflective immunoliposomes to fibrin under various flow conditions. J Drug Target 5,6, 507–518.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Demos, S.M., Onyuksel, H., et al., 1997. In vitro targeting of antibody-conjugated echogenic liposomes for site-specific ultrasonic image enhancement. J Pharm Sci 86,2, 167–171.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Demos, S.M., Ramani, K., et al., 1996. Targeted acoustic liposomes for atherosclerotic enhancement during intravascular and transvascular ultrasonic imaging. Circulation 94, I-209.Google Scholar
  12. Fadok, V.A., Voelker, D.R., et al., 1992. Exposure of phosphatidylserine on the surface of apoptotic lymphocytes triggers specific recognition and removal by macrophages. J Immunol 148,7, 2207–2216.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fisher, N.G., Christiansen, J.P., et al., 2002. Influence of microbubble surface charge on capillary transit and myocardial contrast enhancement. J Am Coll Cardiol 40,4, 811–819.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fu, X., Kassim, S.Y., et al., 2001. Hypochlorous acid oxygenates the cysteine switch domain of pro-matrilysin (MMP-7). A mechanism for matrix metalloproteinase activation and atherosclerotic plaque rupture by myeloperoxidase. J Biol Chem 276,44, 41279–41287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Galis, Z.S., Khatri, J.J. 2002. Matrix metalloproteinases in vascular remodeling and atherogenesis: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Circ Res 90,3, 251–262.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Geng, Y.J., Henderson, L.E., et al., 1997. Fas is expressed in human atherosclerotic intima and promotes apoptosis of cytokine-primed human vascular smooth muscle cells. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 17,10, 2200–2208.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Glagov, S., Weisenberg, E., et al., 1987. Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med 316,22, 1371–1375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gradus-Pizio, I., Bigelow, B., et al., 2002. The role of adventitia in coronary atherosclerosis: results of echocardiographic imaging of the left anterior descending coronary artery. J Am Coll Cardiol 39, 246A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hamilton, A., Benzuly, K., et al., 2002a. Adventitial thickening in non-occlusive atherosclerosis determined by high resolution echocardiographic imaging of the left anterior descending coronary artery. J Invest Med 50, 235A.Google Scholar
  20. Hamilton, A., Rabbat, M., et al., 2002b. A physiologic flow chamber model to define intravascular ultrasound enhancement of fibrin using echogenic liposomes. Invest Radiol 37,4, 215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hamilton, A.J., Huang, S.L., et al., 2004. Intravascular ultrasound molecular imaging of atheroma components in vivo. J Am Coll Cardiol 43,3, 453–460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heath, T.D., Montgomery, J.A., et al., 1983. Antibody-targeted liposomes: increase in specific toxicity of methotrexate-gamma-aspartate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 80,5, 1377–1381.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herrmann, J., Lerman, L.O., et al., 2001. Coronary vasa vasorum neovascularization precedes epicardial endothelial dysfunction in experimental hypercholesterolemia. Cardiovasc Res 51,4, 762–766.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Houston, P., Goodman, J., et al., 2001. Homing markers for atherosclerosis: applications for drug delivery, gene delivery and vascular imaging. FEBS Lett 492,1–2, 73–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Huang, S.L., Hamilton, A.J., et al., 2001. Improving ultrasound reflectivity and stability of echogenic liposomal dispersions for use as targeted ultrasound contrast agents. J Pharm Sci 90,12, 1917–1926.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kasper, H.U., Schmidt, A., et al., 1996. Expression of the adhesion molecules ICAM, VCAM, and ELAM in the arteriosclerotic plaque. Gen Diagn Pathol 141,5–6, 289–294.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Klibanov, A., Gu, H., et al., 1999. Attachment of ligands to gas-filled microbubbles via PEG spacer and lipid residues anchored at the interface. Controlled Release Society, Boston.Google Scholar
  28. Klibanov, A.L., 1999. Targeted delivery of gas-filled microspheres, contrast agents for ultrasound imaging. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 37,1–3, 139–157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Klibanov, A.L., Hughes, M.S., et al., 1997. Targeting of ultrasound contrast material. An in vitro feasibility study. Acta Radiol Suppl 412, 113–120.Google Scholar
  30. Klibanov, A.L., Hughes, M.S., et al., 1998. Targeting of ultrasound contrast material: selective imaging of microbubbles in vitro. Acad Radiol 5,Suppl 1, S243–S246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klibanov, A.L., Rasche, P.T., et al., 2002. Detection of individual microbubbles of an ultrasound contrast agent: fundamental and pulse inversion imaging. Acad Radiol 9,Suppl 2, S279–S281.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Klibanov, A.L., Rasche, P.T., et al., 2004. Detection of individual microbubbles of ultrasound contrast agents: imaging of free-floating and targeted bubbles. Invest Radiol 39,3 187–195.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kolodgie, F.D., Petrov, A., et al., 2003. Targeting of apoptotic macrophages and experimental atheroma with radiolabeled annexin V: a technique with potential for noninvasive imaging of vulnerable plaque. Circulation 108,25, 3134–3139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Korpanty, G., Grayburn, P.A., et al., 2005. Targeting vascular endothelium with avidin microbubbles. Ultrasound Med Biol 31,9, 1279–1283.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kranzhofer, R., Clinton, S.K., et al., 1996. Thrombin potently stimulates cytokine production in human vascular smooth muscle cells but not in mononuclear phagocytes. Circ Res 79,2, 286–294.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Kunjathoor, V.V., Febbraio, M., et al., 2002. Scavenger receptors class A-I/II and CD36 are the principal receptors responsible for the uptake of modified low density lipoprotein leading to lipid loading in macrophages. J Biol Chem 277,51, 49982–49988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kwon, H.M., Sangiorgi, G., et al., 1998. Enhanced coronary vasa vasorum neovascularization in experimental hypercholesterolemia. J Clin Invest 101,8, 1551–1556.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Lanza, G.M., Wallace, K.D., et al., 1996. A novel site-targeted ultrasonic contrast agent with broad biomedical application. Circulation 94,12, 3334–3340.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Leong-Poi, H., Christiansen, J., et al., 2003. Noninvasive assessment of angiogenesis by ultrasound and microbubbles targeted to alpha(v)-integrins. Circulation 107,3, 455–460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lindner, J.R., Coggins, M.P., et al., 2000a. Microbubble persistence in the microcirculation during ischemia/reperfusion and inflammation is caused by integrin-and complement-mediated adherence to activated leukocytes. Circulation 101,6, 668–675.Google Scholar
  41. Lindner, J.R., Dayton, P.A., et al., 2000b. Noninvasive imaging of inflammation by ultrasound detection of phagocytosed microbubbles. Circulation 102,5, 531–538.Google Scholar
  42. Lindner, J.R., Ismail, S., et al., 1998. Albumin microbubble persistence during myocardial contrast echocardiography is associated with microvascular endothelial glycocalyx damage. Circulation 98,20, 2187–2194.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Lindner, J.R., Song, J., et al., 2001. Ultrasound assessment of inflammation and renal tissue injury with microbubbles targeted to P-selectin. Circulation 104,17, 2107–2112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Liu, C., Bhattacharjee, G., et al., 2003. In vivo interrogation of the molecular display of atherosclerotic lesion surfaces. Am J Pathol 163,5, 1859–1871.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Martin, F.J., Heath, T.D., et al., 1990. Covalent attachment of proteins to liposomes. New York, IRL Press.Google Scholar
  46. McPherson, D.D., Sirna, S.J., et al., 1991. Coronary arterial remodeling studied by high-frequency epicardial echocardiography: an early compensatory mechanism in patients with obstructive coronary atherosclerosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 17,1, 79–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moreno, P.R., Purushothaman, K.R., et al., 2002. Intimomedial interface damage and adventitial inflammation is increased beneath disrupted atherosclerosis in the aorta: implications for plaque vulnerability. Circulation 105,21, 2504–2511.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. O’Rourke, R., O’Gara, P., et al., 2004. Diagnosis and management of patients with chronic ischemic heart disease. Hurst’s the heart. V. Fuster, R. Alexander and R. O’Rourke. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1465–1494.Google Scholar
  49. Schumann, P.A., Christiansen, J.P., et al., 2002. Targeted-microbubble binding selectively to GPIIb IIIa receptors of platelet thrombi. Invest Radiol 37,11, 587–593.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shaw, P.X., Horkko, S., et al., 2001. Human-derived anti-oxidized LDL autoantibody blocks uptake of oxidized LDL by macrophages and localizes to atherosclerotic lesions in vivo. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 21,8, 1333–1339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Takeuchi, M., Ogunyankin, K., et al., 1999. Enhanced visualization of intravascular and left atrial appendage thrombus with the use of a thrombus-targeting ultrasonographic contrast agent (MRX-408A1): In vivo experimental echocardiographic studies. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 12,12, 1015–1021.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Unger, E.C., Lund, P.J., et al., 1992. Nitrogen-filled liposomes as a vascular US contrast agent: preliminary evaluation. Radiology 185,2, 453–456.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Unger, E.C., McCreery, T., et al., 1998a. MRX 501: a novel ultrasound contrast agent with therapeutic properties. Acad Radiol 5,Suppl 1, S247–S249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Unger, E.C., McCreery, T.P., et al., 1998b. Acoustically active lipospheres containing paclitaxel: a new therapeutic ultrasound contrast agent. Invest Radiol 33,12, 886–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Unger, E.C., McCreery, T.P., et al., 1998c. In vitro studies of a new thrombus-specific ultrasound contrast agent. Am J Cardiol 81,12A, 58G-61G.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. van der Loo, B., Martin J.F., 1997. The adventitia, endothelium and atherosclerosis. Int J Microcirc Clin Exp 17,5, 280–288.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. van der Wal, A.C., Becker, A.E., et al., 1993. Medial thinning and atherosclerosis– evidence for involvement of a local inflammatory effect. Atherosclerosis 103,1, 55–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Villanueva, F.S., Jankowski, R.J., et al., 1998. Microbubbles targeted to intercellular adhesion molecule-1 bind to activated coronary artery endothelial cells. Circulation 98,1, 1–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Weller, G.E., Lu, E., et al., 2003. Ultrasound imaging of acute cardiac transplant rejection with microbubbles targeted to intercellular adhesion molecule-1. Circulation 108,2, 218–224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wu, Y., Unger, E.C., et al., 1998. Binding and lysing of blood clots using MRX-408. Invest Radiol 33,12, 880–885.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Yasu, T., Greener, Y., et al., 2005. Activated leukocytes and endothelial cells enhance retention of ultrasound contrast microspheres containing perfluoropropane in inflamed venules. Int J Cardiol 98,2, 245–252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick H. Kee
  • David D. McPherson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations