Recent development on peptide-based probes for multifunctional biomedical imaging

Yuling Xu Mei Tian Hong Zhang Yuling Xiao Xuechuan Hong Yao Sun

Citation:  Xu Yuling, Tian Mei, Zhang Hong, Xiao Yuling, Hong Xuechuan, Sun Yao. Recent development on peptide-based probes for multifunctional biomedical imaging[J]. Chinese Chemical Letters, 2018, 29(7): 1093-1097. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2018.03.032 shu

Recent development on peptide-based probes for multifunctional biomedical imaging

English

  • Molecular imaging techniques are indispensable tools in modern diagnostics, because they will allow highly sensitive and specific measurement of biological processes at the molecular, cellular, tissue and body levels, as well as monitoring of therapeutic responses [1, 2]. To date, a variety of imaging modalities, including positron emission tomography (PET), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US) and near infrared fluorescence (NIR) have been actively explored to employ in bioimaging [3-8]. For example, 18F-FDG has been successfully applied as golden standard PET tracer for tumor staging and therapy assessment worldwide, however, the sensitivity and specificity are often less than desired [9]. In order to meet the increasing needs for in vivo basic research and clinical studies, the design of novel functional peptide-based probes with high sensitivity and specificity are still highly demanded. Combinatorial peptide chemistry and phage display technology have profoundly impacted the development of the bioactive synthetic peptides [10-12]. These synthetic peptides could be directly or indirectly labeled with a wide range of imaging modalities via various linkers and conjugated chemistries to construct of peptide-based probes (Fig. 1). In this article, we reviewed the development of peptide-based probes with promising imaging modalities and highlight the successful applications for biomedical imaging in vivo.

    Figure 1

    Figure 1.  General design of peptide-based probes for biomedical imaging.

    PET is one of the most rapidly growing modalities of biomedical imaging with many successful applications in the preclinical and clinical studies [13]. In general, most low molecular weight peptides have several promising advantages compared with their nanomaterial counterparts, such as favorable pharmacokinetics, tissue distribution and fast clearance from blood [12]. However, considering the decay pathway, half-life and positron energy, 68Ga (half-life, 68 min) and 18F (half-life, 109.8 min) would be better match the pharmacokinetics of most radiopharmaceuticals of peptides [13, 14]. Moreover, the design of a desirable PET peptidebased probe with clinical translation ability is expected to own the following properties: 1) high stability and biocompatibility; 2) high binding affinity and specificity; 3) easy preparation and flexible modification [15]. During the past decade, several types of peptide-based PET probes have widely used to detect various diseases [16-18]. For example, the Arg-Gly-Asp (RGD)-containing peptides labeled with 18F, 68Ga and 64Cu radionuclides to serve as PET probes for integrin αVβ3 targeted imaging of glioblastoma, melanoma, breast and prostate cancer [19-21].

    More recently, a small peptide (Arg-Cha-Phe-D)Ser-(D)-ArgTyr-Leu-Trp-Ser, AE105) was developed by combinatorial chemistry and demonstrated high specific binding affinity to urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) [22, 23]. The uPAR is a glycosylphosphatidylinositol anchored cell membrane receptor that is overexpressed in several types of human cancers including glioblastom, head and neck cancer, prostate cancer [22, 24-25]. Therefore, the ability to non-invasively detect and quantify the uPAR expression of potentially malignant tumors is very attractive for cancer diagnosis. Based on AE105 peptide, several uPAR targeted PET probes have been recently designed and applied to image uPAR expression in vivo [26-28]. For example, radiolabeling of NOTA-AE105 with 68Ga was straightforward, and high image contrast resulting in clear tumor delineation was found for 68Ga-NOTA-AE105 [28]. The absolute tumor uptake was lower for 68Ga-NOTA-AE105 ((0.4 ±0.1)% ID/g) than for 18F-FET ((3.5 ±0.8)% ID/g), however, higher tumor-to-background ratio was obtained for 68Ga-NOTA-AE105 (10.6 ±2.3) than for 18F-FET (1.8 ±0.3) (Fig. 2). In order to optimize the absolute uptake of AE105-based probes in tumor, Mathias et al. modified AE105 with 8-amino octanoic acid (AOC) or polyethylene glycol (PEG) spacers to optimize imaging properties [29]. The result of in vivo PET imaging indicated that introduction of PEG spacers more than doubled the in vivo tumor uptake after 1 h (68Ga-PEG8-AE105, (2.01 ±0.22)% ID/g vs. 68GaAE105, (0.70 ±0.40)% ID/g). Thus, 68Ga-PEG8-AE105 is a promising candidate for human translation for PET imaging of uPAR.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2.  PET images of glioblastoma tumor (arrows) bearing mice with 18F-FET, and 68Ga-NOTA-AE105. Copied with permission [28]. Copyright 2016, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Inc.

    In vivo near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging is an emerging biomedical imaging modality for widely use in both basic research and clinical practice [30]. Actually, NIR imaging has many advantages over other imaging modalities such as its high sensitivity, quick feedback, non-hazardous radiation and low cost, etc. [30-32]. Various NIR-Ⅰ probes with multifunctions are developed maturely such as pH-responsive probes, gold cluster and Glycine-conjugated porphyrin fluorescent probe attached with iRGD [33-37]. For instance, Zhu group designed a mitochondria-targeted fluorescent probe DFB1 on the basis of difluoroboron curcuminoid scaffold to detect cysteine, it displayed a NIR-Ⅰ fluorescence in a Cys concentration environment to monitor endogenous Cys effectively in vivo [36]. In addition, monitoring fluvastatin-stimulated endogenous H2S production through NIR-Ⅰ probes also achieved with high performance [37]. Recent studies also indicated that fluorescence imaging in the second nearinfrared window Ⅱ (NIR-Ⅱ, 1, 000–1, 700 nm) is more desirable than that in NIR-Ⅰ (650–900 nm), owing to the greatly reduced photon scattering and negligible tissue autofluorescence, which can dramatically improve imaging quality and signal-to-noise ratio [38, 39]. To data, a handful of peptide-based probes conjugated to various fluorophores for bioimaging has been reported [40, 41]. For example, the gastrin-releasing peptide receptor (GRPR) has been documented in many human prostate cancer and bombesin (BBN, Glu-Gln-Arg-Leu-Gly-Asn-Gln-Trp-Ala-Val-Gly-His-Leu-Met-NH2) peptide exhibits nano-molar affinity and high specificity toward GRPR [42, 43]. Ma et al. reported an Alexa fluor 750 conjugated BBN peptide based NIR-Ⅰ probe, which exhibited high binding specificity to the GRPR on the PC-3 cell membrane [44]. Furthermore, in vivo study showed a significant increase of tumor-to-background ratio in the uptake of this probe at 20 h (7.78:1), as compared to the respective control group. Meanwhile, our group and other groups recently designed a group of NIR-Ⅱ organic dyes based on a donor–acceptor–donor (D-A-D) structure [45-49]. The most promising Q4 dye was conjugated with BBN peptide analogue (RM26 peptide, D-Phe-Gln-Trp-Ala-Val-Gly-HisSta-Leu-NH2) to fabricate the first generation of peptide-based NIR-Ⅱ probes and utilized for GRPR targeted NIR-Ⅱ imaging of prostate cancer in a mouse model (Fig. 3) [45]. Though the RGD peptide based probe has shown promising results for non-invasive molecular imaging of the integrin αVβ3 expression in the NIR-Ⅰ region [50]. Considering the advantages of NIR-Ⅱ imaging, a novel RGD peptide based NIR-Ⅱ probe was developed and represented a highly promising probe for monitoring of early stage glioblastoma in the NIR-Ⅱ window [51].

    Figure 3

    Figure 3.  (a) Conjugation of Q4-1 with NH2-PEG8-RM26 peptide to prepare a GRPR targeted probe, SCH1100. (b) The NIR-Ⅱ images of PC3 tumor mice (n = 3) at different time points after tail vein injection of SCH1100 with or without blocking agent RM26. Copied with permission [45]. Copyright 2016, Royal Society of Chemistry.

    Numerous studies have also indicated that CD13 receptor is an important regulator of endothelial morphogenesis during tumor angiogenesis and overexpression of CD13 is associated with the progression of many tumors, such as prostate cancer and colon cancer [52-54]. The tumor vasculature homing phage containing sequence CNGRCVSGCAGRC was selected by in vivo screening of a phage-displayed peptide library [55]. Therefore, Asn-Gly-Arg (NGR) containing peptide based probes have been developed for CD13-targeted tumor imaging [56, 57]. For example, Chen et al. designed a novel Cy5.5-labeled dimeric NGR peptide probe (Cy5.5- NGR2) via bioorthogonal click chemistry, which exhibited rapid tumor targeting at 0.5 h post-injection (pi) and good tumor-tobackground ratio (2.65 ±0.13) at 2 h pi [58]. These results indicated Cy5.5-NGR2 is a promising probe not only allowing the imaging of CD13 overexpressed tumors, but also having the potential to facilitate monitoring of tumor therapy. Compared with other modalities, NIR imaging is an emerging technique with clear implications for improved cancer surgery by enabling a more distinct delineation of the tumor margins during resection. Recently, Kjaer et al. reported a uPAR-targeted fluorescent probe based on indocyanine green (ICG) conjugated to Glu-Glu-AE105 and the quantitative analysis of the tumor and background uptake showed a tumor to background ratio of 3.52 ±0.17 (Fig. 4) [59]. The results also showed that ICG-AE105 has the potential for clinical translation allowing real-time NIR-imaging in the surgical management of the primary tumor and metastases in pancreatic cancer and other types of uPAR expressing cancers.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4.  (a) The chemical structure of ICG-Glu-Glu-AE105. (b) NIR images of U87MG tumor bearing mice with ICG-Glu-Glu-AE105. Reproduced with permission [59]. Copyright 2016, Juhl et al.

    A surge in dualmodal instrumentation development for clinical application has sparked the discovery of more dualmodal peptidebased probes to clearly delineate the localization and expression of biochemical markers, and effectively track the tumors with highresolution and high-sensitivity [60]. For instance, a powerful synergy can be achieved by combining PET imaging for localization of tumor in the whole body without penetration limitations, and near infrared fluorescence (NIR) imaging for subsequent accurate delineation of tumor lesions and resection margins [4]. To date, a variety of chemical platforms such as small molecules, nanoparticles and polymers have been widely explored to construct dualmodal probes [61-64]. Of all these dualmodal probes, small peptide-based probes remain promising candidates for clinical applications. However, the preparation of dualmodal peptidebased probes remained a challenging task. Although considerable efforts have been explored to simplify the synthesis of these probes, multiple synthetic procedures are still complicated. Moreover, the extensive use of protection-deprotection procedures and chemoselectivity still heavily hinder the widespread applications of such promising probes in bioimaging [65]. Therefore, developing facile chemical strategy with promising platforms for construction of dualmodal peptide-based probes are still highly demanded.

    Based on these challenges, a base-catalyzed chemical strategy with a bicyclo[6.1.0]nonyne (BCN) platform for construction of dualmodal peptide-based probes has been established recently by Sun et al. [65]. Using this strategy, a novel dualmodal PET/NIR-Ⅰ and uPAR-targeted probe 64Cu-CHS1 was prepared and evaluated in U87MG cells and tumor-bearing mice models. The excellent PET/ NIR-Ⅰ imaging characteristics such as good tumor uptake, high tumor to background ratio, and specificity were achieved in the small-animal models (Fig. 5). Meanwhile, Zeng group has described a bifunctional chelator platform for facile construction of dualmodal probes via Cu-free alkyne-azide cycloadditon (SPAAC) chemistry [66]. More importantly, this new platform demonstrated three major advantages, including significantly simplified synthetic steps, ease of purification and higher synthetic yields. More recently, Zeng group has successfully developed a photo-click chemistry strategy for the facile preparation of dualmodal NIR-Ⅰ/PET probes. The diazole photo-click linker between the targeting-ligand and the chelator could also serve as the fluorophore for NIR-Ⅰ imaging [67]. A dualmodal and AE105 peptide based probe was successfully prepared and subsequently applied in the uPAR targeted imaging of the mice bearing U87MG xenograft. Although intraoperative NIR-Ⅰ (650–900 nm) could allow accurate real-time tumor delineation, but the penetration depth of emitted light in biological tissues is limited. There is no doubt that developing novel NIR-Ⅱ dualmodal imaging peptidebased probes for subsequent accurate delineation of tumor lesions and resection margins to achieve more significant improvements in spatial resolution and imaging depth thus has high significance and direct impact on the field of biomedicine [68-70]. In a proofof-concept study, NIR-Ⅱ/PET imaging dualmodality RGD-based probe 68Ga-CHS2 for the first time has been concisely prepared for precise tumor delineation and image-guided surgery (Fig. 6) [71].

    Figure 5

    Figure 5.  AE105 peptide based and uPAR-targeted probe for NIR/PET dualmodal imaging of U87MG tumor model. Reproduced with permission [65]. Copyright 2015, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.

    Figure 6

    Figure 6.  RGD peptide-based and αVβ3-targeted probe for NIR-Ⅱ/PET dual modal imaging of U87MG tumor model. Reproduced with permission [71]. Copyright 2018, Royal Society of Chemistry.

    In summary, we have presented and introduced several types of peptide-based probes with respect to their design and applications. As new bioactive peptides and imaging techniques with improved imaging properties continue to be developed, we envision that they will take a prominent role in biomedicine.

    This work was partially supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC Nos. 21708012, 81773674, 81573383, 21390402, 81725009, 21788102, 81425015), 111 Project (No. B17019), NKR & DPC (No. 2016YFA00900), NSFHP (Nos. 2017CFB151, 2017CFA024, 2017CFB711, 2016ACA126), ABRPSTCS (No. SYG201521), NSFJP (No. BK20160387), Shenzhen Science and Technology Research Grant (No. JCYJ20170303170809222), self-determined research funds of CCNU from the colleges, basic research and operation of MOE for the Central Universities (No. 23020205170469), Wuhan Morning Light Plan of Youth Science and Technology (No. 201705304010321).

    1. [1]

      R. Weissleder, Science 312(2006) 1168-1171. doi: 10.1126/science.1125949

    2. [2]

      G. Hong, A.L. Antaris, H. Dai, Nat. Biomed. Eng. 1(2017) 0010. doi: 10.1038/s41551-016-0010

    3. [3]

      J.M. Hoffman, S.S. Gambhir, Radiology 244(2007) 39-47. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2441060773

    4. [4]

      A. Louie, Chem. Rev. 110(2010) 3146-3195. doi: 10.1021/cr9003538

    5. [5]

      S. Lee, J. Xie, X. Chen, Chem. Rev. 110(2010) 3087-3111. doi: 10.1021/cr900361p

    6. [6]

      F. Ding, S. Chen, W.S. Zhang, Y.F. Tu, Y. Sun, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 25(2017) 5179-5184. doi: 10.1016/j.bmc.2017.08.034

    7. [7]

      M.M. Zhang, Y.Q. Wang, H. Shi, et al., ACS Nano 10(2016) 10075-10085. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.6b05030

    8. [8]

      K.Y. Pu, N. Chattopadhyay, J.H. Rao, J. Control. Release 240(2016) 312-322. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.01.004

    9. [9]

      B. Gulyas, C. Halldin, Q. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 56(2012) 173-190. doi: 10.1007%2Fs11060-014-1505-3

    10. [10]

      O.H. Aina, R. Liu, J.L. Sutcliffe, et al., Mol. Pharm. 4(2007) 631-651. doi: 10.1021/mp700073y

    11. [11]

      V. Petrenko, Expert. Opin. Drug Deliv. 5(2008) 825-836. doi: 10.1517/17425247.5.8.825

    12. [12]

      S. Lee, J. Xie, X.Y. Chen, Proc. Biochem. 49(2010) 1364-1376. doi: 10.1021/bi901135x

    13. [13]

      K. Chen, P.S. Conti, Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 62(2010) 1005-1022. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2010.09.004

    14. [14]

      Y. Sun, X.W. Ma, Z. Zhang, et al., Bioconjug. Chem. 27(2016) 1857-1864. doi: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00279

    15. [15]

      K. Chen, X. Chen, Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 10(2010) 1227-1236. doi: 10.2174/156802610791384225

    16. [16]

      O.C. Boerman, W.J. Oyen, F.H. Corstens, Semin. Nucl. Med. 30(2000) 195-208. doi: 10.1053/snuc.2000.7441

    17. [17]

      X.L. Sun, Y. Li, T. Liu, et al., Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 110(2017) 38-51. doi: 10.1007/s12274-015-0898-4

    18. [18]

      C.F. Ramogida, C. Orvig, Chem. Commun. 49(2013) 4720-4739. doi: 10.1039/c3cc41554f

    19. [19]

      X. Chen, Y. Hou, M. Tohme, et al., J. Nucl. Med. 45(2004) 1776-1783. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-76735-0_12

    20. [20]

      R. Haubner, H. Wester, W. Weber, et al., Cancer Res. 61(2001) 1781-1785.

    21. [21]

      I. Israel, D. Richter, J. Stritzker, et al., Curr. Cancer Drug Target 14(2014) 371-379. doi: 10.2174/1568009614666140403123452

    22. [22]

      M. Ploug, S. Østergaard, H. Gardsvoll, et al., Biochemistry 40(2001) 12157-12168. doi: 10.1021/bi010662g

    23. [23]

      R.P. Zhang, Y. Sun, Y. Qiao, J.D. Li, J. Xie, New J. Chem. 39(2015) 7750-7753. doi: 10.1039/C5NJ01810B

    24. [24]

      B. Jacobsen, M. Ploug, Curr. Med. Chem. 15(2008) 2559-2573. doi: 10.2174/092986708785909012

    25. [25]

      M. Yamamoto, R. Sawaya, S. Mohanam, et al., Cancer Res. 54(1994) 5016-5020.

    26. [26]

      M. Persson, J. Madsen, S. Østergaard, et al., J. Nucl. Med. 53(2012) 138-145. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.110.083386

    27. [27]

      M. Persson, M. Hosseini, J. Madsen, et al., Theranostics 3(2013) 618-632. doi: 10.7150/thno.6810

    28. [28]

      M. Persson, M.K. Nedergaard, M. Brandt-Larsen, et al., J. Nucl. Med. 57(2016) 272-278. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.115.161703

    29. [29]

      D.L. Mathias, Y. Sun, C.H. Liu, et al., Amino Acids 49(2017) 1089-1100. doi: 10.1007/s00726-017-2407-4

    30. [30]

      S.A. Hilderbrand, R. Weissleder, Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 14(2010) 71-79. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2009.09.029

    31. [31]

      R. Weissleder, M.J. Pittet, Nature 452(2008) 580-589. doi: 10.1038/nature06917

    32. [32]

      J. Liu, C. Chen, S.L. Ji, et al., Chem. Sci. 8(2017) 2782-2789. doi: 10.1039/C6SC04384D

    33. [33]

      J.R. Hou, D. Jin, B. Chen, et al., Chin. Chem. Lett. 28(2017) 1681-1687. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2017.03.037

    34. [34]

      H.D. Cui, D.H. Hu, J.N. Zhang, et al., Chin. Chem. Lett. 28(2017) 1391-1398. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2016.12.038

    35. [35]

      Q. Zhang, X. Dong, K.P. Wang, et al., Chin. Chem. Lett. 28(2017) 777-781. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2017.03.001

    36. [36]

      P. Zhang, Z.Q. Guo, C.X. Yan, W.H. Zhu, Chin. Chem. Lett. 28(2017) 1952-1956. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.038

    37. [37]

      L.L. Zhang, H.K. Zhu, C.C. Zhao, X.F. Gu, Chin. Chem. Lett. 28(2017) 218-221. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2016.07.008

    38. [38]

      A.M. Smith, M.C. Mancini, S. Nie, Nat. Nanotechnol. 4(2009) 710-711. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2009.326

    39. [39]

      G. Hong, J.C. Lee, J.T. Robinson, et al., Nat. Med. 18(2012) 1841-1846. doi: 10.1038/nm.2995

    40. [40]

      A. Haque, M.S.H. Faizi, J.A. Rather, M. Khan, Med. Bioorg. Chem. 25(2017) 2017-2034. doi: 10.1016/j.bmc.2017.02.061

    41. [41]

      Y. Sun, S.Y. Hong, X.W. Ma, et al., Chem. Sci. 7(2016) 5888-5892. doi: 10.1039/C6SC01536K

    42. [42]

      P. Mapelli, M. Picchio, Nat. Rev. Urol. 12(2015) 510-518. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.191

    43. [43]

      A.F. Prasanphanich, P.K. Nanda, T.L. Rold, et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104(2007) 12462-12476. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0705347104

    44. [44]

      H. Xu, R. Bandari, Z.R. Jiang, et al., J. Nucl. Med. 58(2017) 262. http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.1879?context=cond-mat.str-el

    45. [45]

      Y. Sun, C.R. Qu, H. Chen, et al., Chem. Sci. 7(2016) 6203-6207. doi: 10.1039/C6SC01561A

    46. [46]

      A.L. Antaris, H. Chen, K. Cheng, et al., Nat. Mater. 15(2016) 235-242. doi: 10.1038/nmat4476

    47. [47]

      K.Q. Shou, C.R. Qu, Y. Sun, et al., Adv. Funct. Mater. 114(2017) 1700995. http://iopscience.iop.org/0038-5670/10/4/R04

    48. [48]

      X.D. Zhang, H.S. Wang, A.L. Antaris, et al., Adv. Mater. 28(2016) 6872-6879. doi: 10.1002/adma.201600706

    49. [49]

      S.J. Zhu, Q.L. Yang, A.L. Antaris, et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114(2017) 962-967. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1617990114

    50. [50]

      A. Bunschoten, D.M. van Willigen, T. Buckle, et al., Bioconjug. Chem. 27(2016) 1253-1258. doi: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00093

    51. [51]

      Y. Sun, M.M. Ding, X.D. Zeng, et al., Chem. Sci. 8(2017) 3489-3493. doi: 10.1039/C7SC00251C

    52. [52]

      S.V. Bhagwat, J. Lahdenranta, R. Giordano, et al., Blood 97(2001) 652-659. doi: 10.1182/blood.V97.3.652

    53. [53]

      J. Teranishi, H. Ishiguro, K. Hoshino, et al., Prostate 68(2008) 1666-1673. doi: 10.1002/pros.v68:15

    54. [54]

      N. Ikeda, Y. Nakajima, T. Tokuhara, et al., Clin. Cancer Res. 9(2003) 1503-1508. doi: 10.1007/s12032-011-9984-y

    55. [55]

      W. Arap, R. Pasqualim, E. Ruoslahti, Science 279(1998) 377-380. doi: 10.1126/science.279.5349.377

    56. [56]

      A.H. Negussie, J.L. Miller, G. Reddy, et al., J. Control Release 143(2010) 265-273. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2009.12.031

    57. [57]

      A. von Wallbrunn, J. Waldeck, C. Holtke, et al., J. Biomed. Opt.13(2008) 011007. doi: 10.1117/1.2839046

    58. [58]

      G.Q. Li, Y. Xing, J. Wang, P.S. Conti, K. Chen, Amino Acids 46(2014) 1547-1556. doi: 10.1007/s00726-014-1727-x

    59. [59]

      K. Juhl, A. Christensen, M. Persson, M. Ploug, A. Kjaer, PloS One 11(2016) e0147428. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147428

    60. [60]

      M. Rudin, R. Weissleder, Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2(2003) 123-131. doi: 10.1038/nrd1007

    61. [61]

      S. Mizukami, R. Takikawa, F. Sugihara, M. Shirakawa, K. Kikuchi, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 48(2009) 3641-3643. doi: 10.1002/anie.v48:20

    62. [62]

      Q.L. Fan, K. Cheng, X. Xu, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136(2014) 15185-15194. doi: 10.1021/ja505412p

    63. [63]

      Y. Sun, S.Y. Hong, X.W. Ma, et al., Chem. Sci. 7(2016) 5888-5892. doi: 10.1039/C6SC01536K

    64. [64]

      Y.Y. Jiang, D. Cui, Y. Fang, et al., Biomaterials 145(2017) 168-177. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.08.037

    65. [65]

      Y. Sun, X.W. Ma, K. Cheng, et al., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54(2015) 5981-5984. doi: 10.1002/anie.201500941

    66. [66]

      Y.K. Gai, G.Y. Xiang, X. Ma, et al., Bioconjug. Chem. 27(2016) 515-520. doi: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00034

    67. [67]

      L.Y. Sun, J.L. Ding, W. Xing, et al., Bioconjug. Chem. 27(2016) 1200-1204. doi: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00115

    68. [68]

      G. Hong, S. Diao, J.L. Jun, et al., Nat. Photon. 8(2014) 723-730. doi: 10.1038/nphoton.2014.166

    69. [69]

      G.S. Hong, S. Diao, A.L. Antaris, H.J. Dai, Chem. Rev. 115(2015) 10816-10906. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00008

    70. [70]

      C.Y. Li, Y.J. Zhang, M. Wang, et al., Biomaterials 35(2014) 393-400. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.10.010

    71. [71]

      Y. Sun, X.D. Zeng, Y.L. Xiao, et al., Chem. Sci. 9(2018) 2092-2097. doi: 10.1039/C7SC04774F

  • Figure 1  General design of peptide-based probes for biomedical imaging.

    Figure 2  PET images of glioblastoma tumor (arrows) bearing mice with 18F-FET, and 68Ga-NOTA-AE105. Copied with permission [28]. Copyright 2016, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Inc.

    Figure 3  (a) Conjugation of Q4-1 with NH2-PEG8-RM26 peptide to prepare a GRPR targeted probe, SCH1100. (b) The NIR-Ⅱ images of PC3 tumor mice (n = 3) at different time points after tail vein injection of SCH1100 with or without blocking agent RM26. Copied with permission [45]. Copyright 2016, Royal Society of Chemistry.

    Figure 4  (a) The chemical structure of ICG-Glu-Glu-AE105. (b) NIR images of U87MG tumor bearing mice with ICG-Glu-Glu-AE105. Reproduced with permission [59]. Copyright 2016, Juhl et al.

    Figure 5  AE105 peptide based and uPAR-targeted probe for NIR/PET dualmodal imaging of U87MG tumor model. Reproduced with permission [65]. Copyright 2015, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.

    Figure 6  RGD peptide-based and αVβ3-targeted probe for NIR-Ⅱ/PET dual modal imaging of U87MG tumor model. Reproduced with permission [71]. Copyright 2018, Royal Society of Chemistry.

  • 加载中
计量
  • PDF下载量:  0
  • 文章访问数:  3127
  • HTML全文浏览量:  79
文章相关
  • 发布日期:  2018-07-22
  • 收稿日期:  2018-02-23
  • 接受日期:  2018-03-22
  • 修回日期:  2018-03-16
  • 网络出版日期:  2018-07-27
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

/

返回文章