Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging

Garry Choy, Sarah O'Connor, Felix E. Diehn, Nick Costouros, H. Richard Alexander, Peter Choyke, Steven K. Libutti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

96 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Optical imaging is a modality that is cost-effective, rapid, easy to use, and can be readily applied to studying disease processes and biology in vivo. For this study, we used a green fluorescent protein (GFP)- and luciferase-expressing mouse tumor model to compare and contrast the quantitative and qualitative capabilities of a fluorescent reporter gene (GFP) and a bioluminescent reporter gene (luciferase). We describe the relationship between tumor volume, tumor mass, and bioluminescent/fluorescent intensity for both GFP and luciferase. Bioluminescent luciferase imaging was shown to be more sensitive than fluorescent GFP imaging. Luciferase-expressing tumors were detected as early as 1 day after tumor cell inoculation, whereas GFP-expressing tumors were not detected until 7 days later. Both bioluminescent and fluorescent intensity correlated significantly and linearly with tumor volume and tumor weight, as measured by caliper. Compared to bioluminescent imaging, fluorescent imaging does not require the injection of a substrate and may be appropriate for applications where sensitivity is not as critical. Knowing the relative strengths of each imaging modality will be important in guiding the decision to use fluorescence or bioluminescence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1022-1030
Number of pages9
JournalBioTechniques
Volume35
Issue number5
StatePublished - Nov 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Optical Imaging
Green Fluorescent Proteins
Luciferases
Tumors
Animals
Imaging techniques
Tumor Burden
Neoplasms
Reporter Genes
Genes
Bioluminescence
Fluorescence
Costs and Cost Analysis
Injections
Cells
Substrates

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biotechnology
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)

Cite this

Choy, G., O'Connor, S., Diehn, F. E., Costouros, N., Alexander, H. R., Choyke, P., & Libutti, S. K. (2003). Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging. BioTechniques, 35(5), 1022-1030.

Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging. / Choy, Garry; O'Connor, Sarah; Diehn, Felix E.; Costouros, Nick; Alexander, H. Richard; Choyke, Peter; Libutti, Steven K.

In: BioTechniques, Vol. 35, No. 5, 11.2003, p. 1022-1030.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Choy, G, O'Connor, S, Diehn, FE, Costouros, N, Alexander, HR, Choyke, P & Libutti, SK 2003, 'Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging', BioTechniques, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 1022-1030.
Choy G, O'Connor S, Diehn FE, Costouros N, Alexander HR, Choyke P et al. Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging. BioTechniques. 2003 Nov;35(5):1022-1030.
Choy, Garry ; O'Connor, Sarah ; Diehn, Felix E. ; Costouros, Nick ; Alexander, H. Richard ; Choyke, Peter ; Libutti, Steven K. / Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging. In: BioTechniques. 2003 ; Vol. 35, No. 5. pp. 1022-1030.
@article{46527e88412f40bda9fd3a2aed1d002c,
title = "Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging",
abstract = "Optical imaging is a modality that is cost-effective, rapid, easy to use, and can be readily applied to studying disease processes and biology in vivo. For this study, we used a green fluorescent protein (GFP)- and luciferase-expressing mouse tumor model to compare and contrast the quantitative and qualitative capabilities of a fluorescent reporter gene (GFP) and a bioluminescent reporter gene (luciferase). We describe the relationship between tumor volume, tumor mass, and bioluminescent/fluorescent intensity for both GFP and luciferase. Bioluminescent luciferase imaging was shown to be more sensitive than fluorescent GFP imaging. Luciferase-expressing tumors were detected as early as 1 day after tumor cell inoculation, whereas GFP-expressing tumors were not detected until 7 days later. Both bioluminescent and fluorescent intensity correlated significantly and linearly with tumor volume and tumor weight, as measured by caliper. Compared to bioluminescent imaging, fluorescent imaging does not require the injection of a substrate and may be appropriate for applications where sensitivity is not as critical. Knowing the relative strengths of each imaging modality will be important in guiding the decision to use fluorescence or bioluminescence.",
author = "Garry Choy and Sarah O'Connor and Diehn, {Felix E.} and Nick Costouros and Alexander, {H. Richard} and Peter Choyke and Libutti, {Steven K.}",
year = "2003",
month = "11",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "1022--1030",
journal = "BioTechniques",
issn = "0736-6205",
publisher = "Eaton Publishing Company",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of noninvasive fluorescent and bioluminescent small animal optical imaging

AU - Choy, Garry

AU - O'Connor, Sarah

AU - Diehn, Felix E.

AU - Costouros, Nick

AU - Alexander, H. Richard

AU - Choyke, Peter

AU - Libutti, Steven K.

PY - 2003/11

Y1 - 2003/11

N2 - Optical imaging is a modality that is cost-effective, rapid, easy to use, and can be readily applied to studying disease processes and biology in vivo. For this study, we used a green fluorescent protein (GFP)- and luciferase-expressing mouse tumor model to compare and contrast the quantitative and qualitative capabilities of a fluorescent reporter gene (GFP) and a bioluminescent reporter gene (luciferase). We describe the relationship between tumor volume, tumor mass, and bioluminescent/fluorescent intensity for both GFP and luciferase. Bioluminescent luciferase imaging was shown to be more sensitive than fluorescent GFP imaging. Luciferase-expressing tumors were detected as early as 1 day after tumor cell inoculation, whereas GFP-expressing tumors were not detected until 7 days later. Both bioluminescent and fluorescent intensity correlated significantly and linearly with tumor volume and tumor weight, as measured by caliper. Compared to bioluminescent imaging, fluorescent imaging does not require the injection of a substrate and may be appropriate for applications where sensitivity is not as critical. Knowing the relative strengths of each imaging modality will be important in guiding the decision to use fluorescence or bioluminescence.

AB - Optical imaging is a modality that is cost-effective, rapid, easy to use, and can be readily applied to studying disease processes and biology in vivo. For this study, we used a green fluorescent protein (GFP)- and luciferase-expressing mouse tumor model to compare and contrast the quantitative and qualitative capabilities of a fluorescent reporter gene (GFP) and a bioluminescent reporter gene (luciferase). We describe the relationship between tumor volume, tumor mass, and bioluminescent/fluorescent intensity for both GFP and luciferase. Bioluminescent luciferase imaging was shown to be more sensitive than fluorescent GFP imaging. Luciferase-expressing tumors were detected as early as 1 day after tumor cell inoculation, whereas GFP-expressing tumors were not detected until 7 days later. Both bioluminescent and fluorescent intensity correlated significantly and linearly with tumor volume and tumor weight, as measured by caliper. Compared to bioluminescent imaging, fluorescent imaging does not require the injection of a substrate and may be appropriate for applications where sensitivity is not as critical. Knowing the relative strengths of each imaging modality will be important in guiding the decision to use fluorescence or bioluminescence.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0242695030&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0242695030&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 1022

EP - 1030

JO - BioTechniques

JF - BioTechniques

SN - 0736-6205

IS - 5

ER -