Model mimicking clinical profile of patients with ovarian cancer @ Yale School of Medicine
Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Murine Model for Non-invasive Imaging to Detect and Monitor Ovarian Cancer Recurrence
1Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Reproductive Immunology Unit, Yale University School of Medicine, 2NatureMost Laboratories, 3Bruker Preclinical Imaging
VIEW VIDEO
http://www.jove.com/video/51815/murine-model-for-non-invasive-imaging-to-detect-monitor-ovarian
Murine Model for Non-invasive Imaging to Detect and Monitor Ovarian Cancer Recurrence
Murine Model for Non-invasive Imaging to Detect and Monitor Ovarian Cancer Recurrence
Natalia J. Sumi, 1 Eydis Lima, 1 John Pizzonia, 2 Sean P. Orton, 3 Vinicius Craveiro, 1 Wonduk Joo, 1Jennie C. Holmberg, 1 Marta Gurrea, 1 Yang Yang-Hartwich, 1 Ayesha Alvero, 1 and Gil Mor 1
Author information ► Copyright and License information ►
Abstract
Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecologic malignancy in the United States. Although patients initially respond to the current standard of care consisting of surgical debulking and combination chemotherapy consisting of platinum and taxane compounds, almost 90% of patients recur within a few years. In these patients the development of chemoresistant disease limits the efficacy of currently available chemotherapy agents and therefore contributes to the high mortality. To discover novel therapy options that can target recurrent disease, appropriate animal models that closely mimic the clinical profile of patients with recurrent ovarian cancer are required. The challenge in monitoring intra-peritoneal (i.p.) disease limits the use of i.p. models and thus most xenografts are established subcutaneously. We have developed a sensitive optical imaging platform that allows the detection and anatomical location of i.p. tumor mass. The platform includes the use of optical reporters that extend from the visible light range to near infrared, which in combination with 2-dimensional X-ray co-registration can provide anatomical location of molecular signals. Detection is significantly improved by the use of a rotation system that drives the animal to multiple angular positions for 360 degree imaging, allowing the identification of tumors that are not visible in single orientation. This platform provides a unique model to non-invasively monitor tumor growth and evaluate the efficacy of new therapies for the prevention or treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer.
Keywords: Cancer Biology, Issue 93, ovarian cancer, recurrence, in vivo imaging, tumor burden, cancer stem cells, chemotherapy
Download video file.(24M, mp4)
SOURCE
2012pharmaceutical
Amandeep Kaur
Aashir Awan, Phd
Abhisar Anand
Adina Hazan
Alan F. Kaul, PharmD., MS, MBA, FCCP
alexcrystal6
anamikasarkar
apreconasia
aviralvatsa
David Orchard-Webb, PhD
danutdaagmailcom
Demet Sag, Ph.D., CRA, GCP
Dror Nir
dsmolyar
Ethan Coomber
evelinacohn
Gail S Thornton
Irina Robu
jayzmit48
jdpmd
jshertok
kellyperlman
Ed Kislauskis
larryhbern
Madison Davis
marzankhan
megbaker58
ofermar2020
Dr. Pati
pkandala
Rosalind Codrington, PhD
ritusaxena
Rick Mandahl
sjwilliamspa
Srinivas Sriram
stuartlpbi
Dr. Sudipta Saha
tildabarliya
vaishnavee24
zraviv06
zs22
This is very insightful. There is no doubt that there is the bias you refer to. 42 years ago, when I was postdocing in biochemistry/enzymology before completing my residency in pathology, I knew that there were very influential mambers of the faculty, who also had large programs, and attracted exceptional students. My mentor, it was said (although he was a great writer), could draft a project on toilet paper and call the NIH. It can’t be true, but it was a time in our history preceding a great explosion. It is bizarre for me to read now about eNOS and iNOS, and about CaMKII-á, â, ã, ä – isoenzymes. They were overlooked during the search for the genome, so intermediary metabolism took a back seat. But the work on protein conformation, and on the mechanism of action of enzymes and ligand and coenzyme was just out there, and became more important with the research on signaling pathways. The work on the mechanism of pyridine nucleotide isoenzymes preceded the work by Burton Sobel on the MB isoenzyme in heart. The Vietnam War cut into the funding, and it has actually declined linearly since.
A few years later, I was an Associate Professor at a new Medical School and I submitted a proposal that was reviewed by the Chairman of Pharmacology, who was a former Director of NSF. He thought it was good enough. I was a pathologist and it went to a Biochemistry Review Committee. It was approved, but not funded. The verdict was that I would not be able to carry out the studies needed, and they would have approached it differently. A thousand young investigators are out there now with similar letters. I was told that the Department Chairmen have to build up their faculty. It’s harder now than then. So I filed for and received 3 patents based on my work at the suggestion of my brother-in-law. When I took it to Boehringer-Mannheim, they were actually clueless.
This is very insightful. There is no doubt that there is the bias you refer to. 42 years ago, when I was postdocing in biochemistry/enzymology before completing my residency in pathology, I knew that there were very influential mambers of the faculty, who also had large programs, and attracted exceptional students. My mentor, it was said (although he was a great writer), could draft a project on toilet paper and call the NIH. It can’t be true, but it was a time in our history preceding a great explosion. It is bizarre for me to read now about eNOS and iNOS, and about CaMKII-á, â, ã, ä – isoenzymes. They were overlooked during the search for the genome, so intermediary metabolism took a back seat. But the work on protein conformation, and on the mechanism of action of enzymes and ligand and coenzyme was just out there, and became more important with the research on signaling pathways. The work on the mechanism of pyridine nucleotide isoenzymes preceded the work by Burton Sobel on the MB isoenzyme in heart. The Vietnam War cut into the funding, and it has actually declined linearly since.
A few years later, I was an Associate Professor at a new Medical School and I submitted a proposal that was reviewed by the Chairman of Pharmacology, who was a former Director of NSF. He thought it was good enough. I was a pathologist and it went to a Biochemistry Review Committee. It was approved, but not funded. The verdict was that I would not be able to carry out the studies needed, and they would have approached it differently. A thousand young investigators are out there now with similar letters. I was told that the Department Chairmen have to build up their faculty. It’s harder now than then. So I filed for and received 3 patents based on my work at the suggestion of my brother-in-law. When I took it to Boehringer-Mannheim, they were actually clueless.