FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗联合吉西他滨抗小鼠肿瘤血管生成及其超声评价的研究
|
摘要
现已证实,肿瘤的生长和发生转移都与其血管的生成具有极高相关性。成纤维细胞生长因子Ⅰ型受体(Fibroblast growth factor receptorl, FGFR1)标志着肿瘤血管已生成,为其标志性分子之一。FGFR1主要通过与其高亲和性配体-bFGF结合来发挥其生物活性作用。可见,阻断bFGF/FGFRl间的信号传导通路就有可能阻断肿瘤血管的形成,进而抑制肿瘤的生长。国外学者和我们前期研究均证实以FGFR1为分子靶标的主动或被动免疫治疗可以有效抑制肿瘤血管生成,达到治疗肿瘤的目的。因此,FGFR1作为抗肿瘤血管生成和靶向治疗的理想靶点,可以进一步应用于后续抗肿瘤血管生成的研究。
吉西他滨为嘧啶类抗肿瘤药,对多种实体肿瘤治疗有效。有研究表明应用传统的化疗药物小剂量长期治疗同样具有抗肿瘤血管生成作用,而且没有毒副作用。因此,如果利用主动免疫疗法联合小剂量化疗将有可能取得更好的肿瘤治疗效果。
微血管密度(microvessel density, MVD)能较好地反映血管生成活性,但其无法在体实时检测。高频超声结合eFlow显像技术敏感性、时间及空间分辨率高,明显改善了低速和微小血管的显示,使得探测肿瘤微血管成为可能。近年来,超声造影剂及相关技术的应用为超声检查提供了新的诊断方式,极大地改善了超声对血流显示的敏感性。灰阶谐波超声造影技术是近年新兴的一种微循环血流灌注评价方法。造影剂微气泡可增加声波的反射,显著增强二维和多普勒超声的信号,使肿瘤内血流的显示率提高,使造影前未能显示的低速细小血流得以显示。
综上,本研究拟在前期研究基础上,利用鸡FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗联合小剂量吉西他滨化疗在小鼠肿瘤模型中进行抗肿瘤血管生成作用观察,了解联合治疗是否能够提高抗肿瘤效应,并初步探讨其作用机理。同时,通过对肿瘤微血管的CDFI、高频超声结合eFlow技术及超声造影的显像结果进行全面定量研究,初步探讨FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗联合吉西他滨抗小鼠肿瘤血管生成效果及其超声成像技术的评价价值。
本研究分为以下三部分：
本部分在前期研究基础上,以小鼠纤维肉瘤MethA肿瘤模型为对象进行实验,观察抗肿瘤治疗后肿瘤体积、微血管密度、细胞凋亡和增殖以及是否产生抗自身FGFR1抗体等指标,分为联合C+G组、单独cFR组、吉西他滨G单独组、生理盐水NS组,一共4组,了解鸡FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗主动免疫联合小剂量的吉西他滨化疗是否能够提高抗肿瘤效果,并初步探讨其作用机理,为肿瘤治疗开辟新途径。
结果显示：①于接种肿瘤后27天,各实验组小鼠肿瘤体积大小(mmm3)分别为876±46.78(C+G组)、1123±82.12(cFR组)、1689±160.11(G组)和4321±182.80(NS组)。联合治疗C+G组与其余各组相比,差异具有统计学(P<0.05)。②C+G组小鼠生存时间较cFR组、G组和NS对照组明显延长,至接种瘤细胞后第46天存活率为90%,C+G组与各对照组小鼠的存活率之间差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。③Western blot及免疫荧光检测均发现C+G组、cFR组均有抗FGFR1抗体产生,G组、NS组均未见抗体产生。④ELISPOT检测C+G组、G组、cFR组和NS组小鼠所产生的分泌抗小鼠FGFR1抗体的B淋巴细胞数量计数分别为(113.75±11.08)／106个脾细胞、(5.62±1.79)／106个脾细胞、(112.26±12.47)／106个脾细胞和(5.51±1.92)／106个脾细胞。⑤肿瘤组织内微血管密度计数明显减少,每高倍镜视野各组肿瘤组织内微血管密度分别是9.41±1.78(C+G组)、15.51±3.20(cFR组)、31.88±3.59(G组)和39.25±2.86(NS组),C+G组在分别较之G组、NS组显示差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。⑥TUNEL细胞凋亡检测法及PCNA抗体染色方法分别检测结果显示：C+G组、cFR组、G组和NS组各组肿瘤细胞的凋亡指数分别是28.77±3.33%、13.75±1.74%、14.69±2.30%和2.34±0.78%；C+G组凋亡指数明显高于其他各组(P<0.05)。各组增殖指数分别是7.72±1.35%(C+G组)、14.46±3.60%(cFR组)、17.87±3.18%(G组)和28.26±2.33%(NS组),C+G组肿瘤细胞的增殖指数明显低于其他各组(P<0.05)。⑦联合治疗在肿瘤体积、微血管密度、细胞调亡和增殖中均具有协同作用,协同指数分别为1.63、1.05、1.17和1.20。
本部分以小鼠纤维肉瘤MethA肿瘤模型为对象进行实验观察,同第一部分分为4组,了解在评价鸡FGFR1重组蛋白联合小剂量吉西他滨抗小鼠肿瘤血管生成疗效中eFlow技术的价值。
结果显示：①荷瘤后肿瘤40只小鼠均成活,可见皮下明显的多呈凸外性肿瘤结节。②高频超声结合eFlow技术显示肿瘤内的微血管走行扭曲,管径粗细及血管分布不均匀,可见部分中心向边缘细小血管分支及吻合支。eFlow成像较CDFI更能显示肿瘤内分支细小血管,敏感性更高。③各实验组的血管-肿瘤像素比(%)分别为14.13±3.31(NS),12.11±1.91(G),6.12±1.85(cFR),3.41±1.51 (C+G),呈递减趋势,各组分别与NS组两两相比较,C+G组、cFR组均小于NS组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),G组与NS组间无差异(P>0.05)；C+G组、cFR组、G组组间比较,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。
本部分以小鼠纤维肉瘤MethA肿瘤模型为对象进行实验观察,同第一、二部分分为4组,探讨在评价鸡FGFR1重组蛋白联合小剂量吉西他滨抗小鼠肿瘤血管生成疗效中的超声造影技术的应用价值。
结果显示：①造影前小鼠肿瘤内部为不均质回声表现,肿瘤边界显示欠清,CDFI显示肿瘤内部及边缘血供稀疏；注射造影剂后可见小鼠自体血管的血流快速散流向肿瘤周边、在肿瘤边缘绕行后流入肿瘤内部；肿瘤内部实质回声整体有不同程度增强,使得肿瘤边界显示清晰,可视性好。②造影前各组彩色多普勒血管-肿瘤像素比分别为C+G组(1.71±1.34)、cFR组(3.81±1.99)、G组(5.62±2.22)、NS组(9.12±2.77)；造影后各组彩色多普勒血管-肿瘤像素比分别为C+G组(5.91±1.37)、cFR组(9.52±1.35)、G组(15.51±2.42)、NS组(20.72±3.23),造影前后C+G组、cFR组、与NS组间血管-肿瘤像素比差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)；G组与NS组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)；造影前后同一组内差异的比较具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。
1.鸡FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗联合低剂量吉西他滨抗肿瘤血管生成的作用比单独治疗更佳；联合治疗抗肿瘤作用主要是通过主动免疫诱导产生抗自身FGFR1的抗体抑制肿瘤血管生成来实现的；联合治疗在抑制肿瘤生长及肿瘤血管生成、诱导肿瘤细胞凋亡和抑制细胞增殖作用中具有协同效应。
2.高频超声结合eFlow显像技术能够显示肿瘤内的微血管走行、分布情况,较CDFI更能显示肿瘤内分支细小血管,敏感性更高,为评价小鼠肿瘤模型中抗肿瘤血管生成的疗效提供了一种实时的、无创性的新方法。
3.超声造影可增强肿瘤内微血管的走行、分布的显示及肿瘤与其相邻组织之间的对比性,从而提高肿瘤及肿瘤微血管的检出率,能够为在体实时评价小鼠肿瘤模型中抗肿瘤血管生成效果提供一种直观、敏感的方法。
It is well known that the tumor growth and metastasis are closely related to tumor angiogenesis. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) is one of the most important angiogenesis factor, and plays a role in its biological activity primarily through its high-affinity and ligand-bFGF. Therefore, blocking the signal transduction pathway between the bFGF/FGFR1 can inhibit the formation of tumor blood vessels, and sequently suppress tumor growth. Foreign scholars and our preliminary studies confirmed that the active or passive immunotherapy targeting FGFR1 can effectively inhibit tumor angiogenesis to achieve the purpose of tumor treatment. Accordingly, FGFR1 are regarded as the ideal target for anti-tumor angiogenesis and targeted therapy and can be used for further anti-cancer research.
Gemcitabine is a new deoxycytidine analogue and has shown cytotoxicity against solid tumors. Studies have shown that traditional low-dose chemotherapy for a long time has the same effect on the treatment of anti-angiogenesis but no toxic side-effects. Thus, it is possible to achieve better treatment of tumor by combining the active immunotherapy with low-dose chemotherapy.
Microvessel density (MVD) can better reflect the angiogenesis activity, however, its can not be detected in vivo. Eflow combination with high-frequency ultrasound imaging is more sensitive and has more time and high spatial resolution, which significant manifests the low-speed flow and small blood vessels, making it possible to detect the tumor microvessel. In recent years, the application of ultrasound contrast agents and its related technology provides a new way for ultrasound diagnosis, and greatly improved the diagnostic sensitivity of the blood flow. Harmonic gray-scale contrast-enhanced ultrasound technology is a new method to evaluate the blood flow microcirculation in recent years. Gas microbubble of the contrast agent can increase the acoustic reflex, and significantly enhance the two-dimensional image and Doppler ultrasound signal, improving the display rate of tumor blood flow and manifesting the low blood flow that can not show before ultrasound contrast.
Taken together, we investigated the anti-tumor angiogenesis effect of combining the chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine with low doses of gemcitabine chemotherapy in mouse tumor model, and explored the related mechanism. Meanwhile, we studied the function of the CDFI, high-frequency ultrasound combined with eflow and ultrasound contrast imaging technology in quantitatively detecting tumor microvessel, and investigated the role of ultrasound imaging technology in evaluating the treatment of anti-tumor angiogenesis by chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine combined with low-dose-gemcitabine.
This study is divided into three parts as follows:
This part is based on the preliminary studies. we aim the MethA fibrosarcoma tumor model in mice as the object for experimental observation about the tumor volume, microvessel density, apoptosis and proliferation and whether they could produce their own anti-FGFR1 antibody or not after anti-tumor treatment. All the mice were divided into 4 Groups:combined therapy group (C+Ggroup), recombinant protein vaccine of chicken FGFR1 alone treatment group (cFR group), gemcitabine alone treatment group (G group), non-treatment control group (NS group), to know how the chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein active immunization vaccine combined with low-dose gemcitabine chemotherapy can improve the anti-tumor effects and to explore its mechanism, so that we can open up a new way of tumor therapy.
Results:①In the 27th, after tumor inoculation, the tumor size (mm3) of the mice were 876±46.78 (C+G group),1123±82.12 (cFR group),1689±160.11 (G group) and 4321±182.80 (NS group). C+G combination therapy group made statistical difference compared with the rest of the groups (P<0.05).②C+G group was significantly prolonged the survival time of mice. After inoculation tumor cells for 46 days the survival rate of C+G group was 90%, C+G group and the control group, the difference between the survival rate of mice with statistical significance (P＜0.05).③Western blot and immunofluorescence assay have found that it have generated anti-FGFR1 antibody in C+G group and cFR groups. Without any anti-FGFR1 antibody has been found in G group and NS group.④ELISPOT detection the number of C+G group, cFR group, G group and the NS group of the B-lymphocyte which can generate anti-mouse-FGFR1 antibody, are (113.75±11.08)/106, (112.26±12.47)/106, (5.62±1.79)/106, (5.51±1.92)/106.⑤The count of tumor microvessel density in high-power microscope field of vision of each group were 9.41±1.77 (C+G group),15.5±3.20 (cFR group),31.9±3.60 (G group) and 39.3±2.87 (NS group). Among C+G group, G group and NS group, the differences were significant (P<0.05).⑥TUNEL and PCNA antibody staining was detected the tumor cells apoptosis and proliferation. The results showed that:tumor cells apoptotic index of each group were 28.77±3.33% (C+G group),13.75±1.74% (cFR group),14.69±2.30%(G group) and 2.34±0.78% (NS group). C+G group apoptotic index was significantly higher than other groups (P＜0.05). C+G group of tumor cell proliferation index was significantly lower than other groups (P＜0.05), proliferation index in each group were 7.72±1.35% (C+G group), 14.46±3.60% (cFR group),17.87±3.18% (G group) and 28.26±2.33% (NS group).⑦Combination therapy in tumor volume, microvessel density, apoptosis and proliferation are synergies, and the synergy index is 1.63,1.05, 1.17 and 1.20.
In this part, we aim the MethA fibrosarcoma tumor model in mice as the object for experimental observation. All the mice are divided into 4 groups: treatment group (C+G group), chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine alone treatment group (cFR group), gemcitabine alone treatment group (G group), non-treatment control group (NS group), to exploring the evaluation value of color Doppler imaging and high-frequency ultrasound combined with eFlow imaging for detecting the efficacy of anti-tumor angiogenesis by chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein combined gemcitabine.
Results:①40 mice were all successed to be tumor-beared (40/40). The tumor formations are obvious subcutaneous nodules.②Most of the nodules are prominent growth out, the early type was spherical, the latter was the disc-shaped or lobulated.③It is visible to see the large distortion trophoblast vascular of the tumor on the surface of the lower skin. High-frequency ultrasound combined with eFlow Technology showed that tumor microvessel traveling distorted, and the vascular diameter of uneven thickness, we can see some of the centers to the edge of a small vascular branches and ansa. eFlow imaging can show more small branches of tumor blood vessels, and has a higher sensitivity than CDFI.④The vessels-tumor-pixel ratio (%) of C+G group, cFR group, G group, NS Group were 3.41±1.51,6.12±1.85, 12.11±1.91,14.13±3.31, and the trend was higher. Compared with the NS group, either C+G group or cFR group are less than it, with the statistically significant differences (P＜0.05). There was no significant difference between G group and NS group (P>0.05); C+G group, cFR group, G group of inter-group differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).
In this part, we aim the MethA fibrosarcoma tumor model in mice as the object for experimental observation. All the mice were divided into 4 groups: treatment group (C+G group), chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine alone treatment group (cFR group), gemcitabine alone treatment group (G group), non-treatment control group (NS group), to explore the evaluation value of the effect of chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein combined low-dose gemcitabine in anti-tumor angiogenesis by ultrasound contrast imaging.
Results:①Before ultrasound contrast, the tumor 2D echo showed less clearance edge, and CDFI showed that the tumor blood flow within and around being the scarce supply. After contrast-enhanced imaging, the host of blood vessels in tumors can be seen rapid flow bypass and into the tumor after injecting the contrast agents about 3-8s, and the tumor echo showed varying degrees, in real terms and in the overall enhanced which can make the tumor border more clear to see.②Before contrast, color Doppler blood vessels-tumor pixels ratio (%) in C+G组each group were C+G group (1.71±1.34), cFR group (3.81±1.99), G group (5.62±2.22), NS group (9.12±2.77). After contrast imaging, the vascular-tumor pixels in each group were C+G group (5.91±1.37), cFR group (9.52±1.35), G group (15.51±2.42) and NS group (20.72±3.23). Before and after contrast, the blood vessels-tumor pixels of C+G group, cFR group, NS group have statistical significance differences (P<0.05); G group and NS group there was no significant difference (P＞0.05); within the same group, also there is a statistically significant difference (P<0.05).
Conclusion
Based on the present study, our conclusions are as follows:
①The angiogenesis effect of Chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine combined with low-dose gemcitabine antitumor is better than medication alone; the role of combined anti-tumor active immunization mainly through self-induced anti-FGFR1 antibody to inhibite tumor angiogenesis; Combined therapy have a synergistic effect on inhibiting tumor growth and tumor angiogenesis, tumor-induced apoptosis and inhibited cell proliferation.
②High-frequency ultrasound combined with eFlow imaging technology can show tumor microvessel course and the distribution of small branches of tumor blood vessels, which has a higher sensitivity than CDFI. It can provide a real-time and a new non-invasive method for the evaluation of anti-tumor effect of angiogenesis.
③Ultrasound contrast may enhance the tumor and the tumor microvessel display contrast with the surrounding tissue, and enhance the tumor and the tumor microvessel detection rate. It can provide an intuitive, sensitive and real-time methods for evaluation the anti-tumor effect of angiogenesis.
吉西他滨为嘧啶类抗肿瘤药,对多种实体肿瘤治疗有效。有研究表明应用传统的化疗药物小剂量长期治疗同样具有抗肿瘤血管生成作用,而且没有毒副作用。因此,如果利用主动免疫疗法联合小剂量化疗将有可能取得更好的肿瘤治疗效果。
微血管密度(microvessel density, MVD)能较好地反映血管生成活性,但其无法在体实时检测。高频超声结合eFlow显像技术敏感性、时间及空间分辨率高,明显改善了低速和微小血管的显示,使得探测肿瘤微血管成为可能。近年来,超声造影剂及相关技术的应用为超声检查提供了新的诊断方式,极大地改善了超声对血流显示的敏感性。灰阶谐波超声造影技术是近年新兴的一种微循环血流灌注评价方法。造影剂微气泡可增加声波的反射,显著增强二维和多普勒超声的信号,使肿瘤内血流的显示率提高,使造影前未能显示的低速细小血流得以显示。
综上,本研究拟在前期研究基础上,利用鸡FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗联合小剂量吉西他滨化疗在小鼠肿瘤模型中进行抗肿瘤血管生成作用观察,了解联合治疗是否能够提高抗肿瘤效应,并初步探讨其作用机理。同时,通过对肿瘤微血管的CDFI、高频超声结合eFlow技术及超声造影的显像结果进行全面定量研究,初步探讨FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗联合吉西他滨抗小鼠肿瘤血管生成效果及其超声成像技术的评价价值。
本研究分为以下三部分：
本部分在前期研究基础上,以小鼠纤维肉瘤MethA肿瘤模型为对象进行实验,观察抗肿瘤治疗后肿瘤体积、微血管密度、细胞凋亡和增殖以及是否产生抗自身FGFR1抗体等指标,分为联合C+G组、单独cFR组、吉西他滨G单独组、生理盐水NS组,一共4组,了解鸡FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗主动免疫联合小剂量的吉西他滨化疗是否能够提高抗肿瘤效果,并初步探讨其作用机理,为肿瘤治疗开辟新途径。
结果显示：①于接种肿瘤后27天,各实验组小鼠肿瘤体积大小(mmm3)分别为876±46.78(C+G组)、1123±82.12(cFR组)、1689±160.11(G组)和4321±182.80(NS组)。联合治疗C+G组与其余各组相比,差异具有统计学(P<0.05)。②C+G组小鼠生存时间较cFR组、G组和NS对照组明显延长,至接种瘤细胞后第46天存活率为90%,C+G组与各对照组小鼠的存活率之间差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。③Western blot及免疫荧光检测均发现C+G组、cFR组均有抗FGFR1抗体产生,G组、NS组均未见抗体产生。④ELISPOT检测C+G组、G组、cFR组和NS组小鼠所产生的分泌抗小鼠FGFR1抗体的B淋巴细胞数量计数分别为(113.75±11.08)／106个脾细胞、(5.62±1.79)／106个脾细胞、(112.26±12.47)／106个脾细胞和(5.51±1.92)／106个脾细胞。⑤肿瘤组织内微血管密度计数明显减少,每高倍镜视野各组肿瘤组织内微血管密度分别是9.41±1.78(C+G组)、15.51±3.20(cFR组)、31.88±3.59(G组)和39.25±2.86(NS组),C+G组在分别较之G组、NS组显示差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。⑥TUNEL细胞凋亡检测法及PCNA抗体染色方法分别检测结果显示：C+G组、cFR组、G组和NS组各组肿瘤细胞的凋亡指数分别是28.77±3.33%、13.75±1.74%、14.69±2.30%和2.34±0.78%；C+G组凋亡指数明显高于其他各组(P<0.05)。各组增殖指数分别是7.72±1.35%(C+G组)、14.46±3.60%(cFR组)、17.87±3.18%(G组)和28.26±2.33%(NS组),C+G组肿瘤细胞的增殖指数明显低于其他各组(P<0.05)。⑦联合治疗在肿瘤体积、微血管密度、细胞调亡和增殖中均具有协同作用,协同指数分别为1.63、1.05、1.17和1.20。
本部分以小鼠纤维肉瘤MethA肿瘤模型为对象进行实验观察,同第一部分分为4组,了解在评价鸡FGFR1重组蛋白联合小剂量吉西他滨抗小鼠肿瘤血管生成疗效中eFlow技术的价值。
结果显示：①荷瘤后肿瘤40只小鼠均成活,可见皮下明显的多呈凸外性肿瘤结节。②高频超声结合eFlow技术显示肿瘤内的微血管走行扭曲,管径粗细及血管分布不均匀,可见部分中心向边缘细小血管分支及吻合支。eFlow成像较CDFI更能显示肿瘤内分支细小血管,敏感性更高。③各实验组的血管-肿瘤像素比(%)分别为14.13±3.31(NS),12.11±1.91(G),6.12±1.85(cFR),3.41±1.51 (C+G),呈递减趋势,各组分别与NS组两两相比较,C+G组、cFR组均小于NS组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),G组与NS组间无差异(P>0.05)；C+G组、cFR组、G组组间比较,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。
本部分以小鼠纤维肉瘤MethA肿瘤模型为对象进行实验观察,同第一、二部分分为4组,探讨在评价鸡FGFR1重组蛋白联合小剂量吉西他滨抗小鼠肿瘤血管生成疗效中的超声造影技术的应用价值。
结果显示：①造影前小鼠肿瘤内部为不均质回声表现,肿瘤边界显示欠清,CDFI显示肿瘤内部及边缘血供稀疏；注射造影剂后可见小鼠自体血管的血流快速散流向肿瘤周边、在肿瘤边缘绕行后流入肿瘤内部；肿瘤内部实质回声整体有不同程度增强,使得肿瘤边界显示清晰,可视性好。②造影前各组彩色多普勒血管-肿瘤像素比分别为C+G组(1.71±1.34)、cFR组(3.81±1.99)、G组(5.62±2.22)、NS组(9.12±2.77)；造影后各组彩色多普勒血管-肿瘤像素比分别为C+G组(5.91±1.37)、cFR组(9.52±1.35)、G组(15.51±2.42)、NS组(20.72±3.23),造影前后C+G组、cFR组、与NS组间血管-肿瘤像素比差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)；G组与NS组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)；造影前后同一组内差异的比较具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。
1.鸡FGFR1重组蛋白疫苗联合低剂量吉西他滨抗肿瘤血管生成的作用比单独治疗更佳；联合治疗抗肿瘤作用主要是通过主动免疫诱导产生抗自身FGFR1的抗体抑制肿瘤血管生成来实现的；联合治疗在抑制肿瘤生长及肿瘤血管生成、诱导肿瘤细胞凋亡和抑制细胞增殖作用中具有协同效应。
2.高频超声结合eFlow显像技术能够显示肿瘤内的微血管走行、分布情况,较CDFI更能显示肿瘤内分支细小血管,敏感性更高,为评价小鼠肿瘤模型中抗肿瘤血管生成的疗效提供了一种实时的、无创性的新方法。
3.超声造影可增强肿瘤内微血管的走行、分布的显示及肿瘤与其相邻组织之间的对比性,从而提高肿瘤及肿瘤微血管的检出率,能够为在体实时评价小鼠肿瘤模型中抗肿瘤血管生成效果提供一种直观、敏感的方法。
It is well known that the tumor growth and metastasis are closely related to tumor angiogenesis. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) is one of the most important angiogenesis factor, and plays a role in its biological activity primarily through its high-affinity and ligand-bFGF. Therefore, blocking the signal transduction pathway between the bFGF/FGFR1 can inhibit the formation of tumor blood vessels, and sequently suppress tumor growth. Foreign scholars and our preliminary studies confirmed that the active or passive immunotherapy targeting FGFR1 can effectively inhibit tumor angiogenesis to achieve the purpose of tumor treatment. Accordingly, FGFR1 are regarded as the ideal target for anti-tumor angiogenesis and targeted therapy and can be used for further anti-cancer research.
Gemcitabine is a new deoxycytidine analogue and has shown cytotoxicity against solid tumors. Studies have shown that traditional low-dose chemotherapy for a long time has the same effect on the treatment of anti-angiogenesis but no toxic side-effects. Thus, it is possible to achieve better treatment of tumor by combining the active immunotherapy with low-dose chemotherapy.
Microvessel density (MVD) can better reflect the angiogenesis activity, however, its can not be detected in vivo. Eflow combination with high-frequency ultrasound imaging is more sensitive and has more time and high spatial resolution, which significant manifests the low-speed flow and small blood vessels, making it possible to detect the tumor microvessel. In recent years, the application of ultrasound contrast agents and its related technology provides a new way for ultrasound diagnosis, and greatly improved the diagnostic sensitivity of the blood flow. Harmonic gray-scale contrast-enhanced ultrasound technology is a new method to evaluate the blood flow microcirculation in recent years. Gas microbubble of the contrast agent can increase the acoustic reflex, and significantly enhance the two-dimensional image and Doppler ultrasound signal, improving the display rate of tumor blood flow and manifesting the low blood flow that can not show before ultrasound contrast.
Taken together, we investigated the anti-tumor angiogenesis effect of combining the chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine with low doses of gemcitabine chemotherapy in mouse tumor model, and explored the related mechanism. Meanwhile, we studied the function of the CDFI, high-frequency ultrasound combined with eflow and ultrasound contrast imaging technology in quantitatively detecting tumor microvessel, and investigated the role of ultrasound imaging technology in evaluating the treatment of anti-tumor angiogenesis by chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine combined with low-dose-gemcitabine.
This study is divided into three parts as follows:
This part is based on the preliminary studies. we aim the MethA fibrosarcoma tumor model in mice as the object for experimental observation about the tumor volume, microvessel density, apoptosis and proliferation and whether they could produce their own anti-FGFR1 antibody or not after anti-tumor treatment. All the mice were divided into 4 Groups:combined therapy group (C+Ggroup), recombinant protein vaccine of chicken FGFR1 alone treatment group (cFR group), gemcitabine alone treatment group (G group), non-treatment control group (NS group), to know how the chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein active immunization vaccine combined with low-dose gemcitabine chemotherapy can improve the anti-tumor effects and to explore its mechanism, so that we can open up a new way of tumor therapy.
Results:①In the 27th, after tumor inoculation, the tumor size (mm3) of the mice were 876±46.78 (C+G group),1123±82.12 (cFR group),1689±160.11 (G group) and 4321±182.80 (NS group). C+G combination therapy group made statistical difference compared with the rest of the groups (P<0.05).②C+G group was significantly prolonged the survival time of mice. After inoculation tumor cells for 46 days the survival rate of C+G group was 90%, C+G group and the control group, the difference between the survival rate of mice with statistical significance (P＜0.05).③Western blot and immunofluorescence assay have found that it have generated anti-FGFR1 antibody in C+G group and cFR groups. Without any anti-FGFR1 antibody has been found in G group and NS group.④ELISPOT detection the number of C+G group, cFR group, G group and the NS group of the B-lymphocyte which can generate anti-mouse-FGFR1 antibody, are (113.75±11.08)/106, (112.26±12.47)/106, (5.62±1.79)/106, (5.51±1.92)/106.⑤The count of tumor microvessel density in high-power microscope field of vision of each group were 9.41±1.77 (C+G group),15.5±3.20 (cFR group),31.9±3.60 (G group) and 39.3±2.87 (NS group). Among C+G group, G group and NS group, the differences were significant (P<0.05).⑥TUNEL and PCNA antibody staining was detected the tumor cells apoptosis and proliferation. The results showed that:tumor cells apoptotic index of each group were 28.77±3.33% (C+G group),13.75±1.74% (cFR group),14.69±2.30%(G group) and 2.34±0.78% (NS group). C+G group apoptotic index was significantly higher than other groups (P＜0.05). C+G group of tumor cell proliferation index was significantly lower than other groups (P＜0.05), proliferation index in each group were 7.72±1.35% (C+G group), 14.46±3.60% (cFR group),17.87±3.18% (G group) and 28.26±2.33% (NS group).⑦Combination therapy in tumor volume, microvessel density, apoptosis and proliferation are synergies, and the synergy index is 1.63,1.05, 1.17 and 1.20.
In this part, we aim the MethA fibrosarcoma tumor model in mice as the object for experimental observation. All the mice are divided into 4 groups: treatment group (C+G group), chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine alone treatment group (cFR group), gemcitabine alone treatment group (G group), non-treatment control group (NS group), to exploring the evaluation value of color Doppler imaging and high-frequency ultrasound combined with eFlow imaging for detecting the efficacy of anti-tumor angiogenesis by chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein combined gemcitabine.
Results:①40 mice were all successed to be tumor-beared (40/40). The tumor formations are obvious subcutaneous nodules.②Most of the nodules are prominent growth out, the early type was spherical, the latter was the disc-shaped or lobulated.③It is visible to see the large distortion trophoblast vascular of the tumor on the surface of the lower skin. High-frequency ultrasound combined with eFlow Technology showed that tumor microvessel traveling distorted, and the vascular diameter of uneven thickness, we can see some of the centers to the edge of a small vascular branches and ansa. eFlow imaging can show more small branches of tumor blood vessels, and has a higher sensitivity than CDFI.④The vessels-tumor-pixel ratio (%) of C+G group, cFR group, G group, NS Group were 3.41±1.51,6.12±1.85, 12.11±1.91,14.13±3.31, and the trend was higher. Compared with the NS group, either C+G group or cFR group are less than it, with the statistically significant differences (P＜0.05). There was no significant difference between G group and NS group (P>0.05); C+G group, cFR group, G group of inter-group differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).
In this part, we aim the MethA fibrosarcoma tumor model in mice as the object for experimental observation. All the mice were divided into 4 groups: treatment group (C+G group), chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine alone treatment group (cFR group), gemcitabine alone treatment group (G group), non-treatment control group (NS group), to explore the evaluation value of the effect of chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein combined low-dose gemcitabine in anti-tumor angiogenesis by ultrasound contrast imaging.
Results:①Before ultrasound contrast, the tumor 2D echo showed less clearance edge, and CDFI showed that the tumor blood flow within and around being the scarce supply. After contrast-enhanced imaging, the host of blood vessels in tumors can be seen rapid flow bypass and into the tumor after injecting the contrast agents about 3-8s, and the tumor echo showed varying degrees, in real terms and in the overall enhanced which can make the tumor border more clear to see.②Before contrast, color Doppler blood vessels-tumor pixels ratio (%) in C+G组each group were C+G group (1.71±1.34), cFR group (3.81±1.99), G group (5.62±2.22), NS group (9.12±2.77). After contrast imaging, the vascular-tumor pixels in each group were C+G group (5.91±1.37), cFR group (9.52±1.35), G group (15.51±2.42) and NS group (20.72±3.23). Before and after contrast, the blood vessels-tumor pixels of C+G group, cFR group, NS group have statistical significance differences (P<0.05); G group and NS group there was no significant difference (P＞0.05); within the same group, also there is a statistically significant difference (P<0.05).
Conclusion
Based on the present study, our conclusions are as follows:
①The angiogenesis effect of Chicken FGFR1 recombinant protein vaccine combined with low-dose gemcitabine antitumor is better than medication alone; the role of combined anti-tumor active immunization mainly through self-induced anti-FGFR1 antibody to inhibite tumor angiogenesis; Combined therapy have a synergistic effect on inhibiting tumor growth and tumor angiogenesis, tumor-induced apoptosis and inhibited cell proliferation.
②High-frequency ultrasound combined with eFlow imaging technology can show tumor microvessel course and the distribution of small branches of tumor blood vessels, which has a higher sensitivity than CDFI. It can provide a real-time and a new non-invasive method for the evaluation of anti-tumor effect of angiogenesis.
③Ultrasound contrast may enhance the tumor and the tumor microvessel display contrast with the surrounding tissue, and enhance the tumor and the tumor microvessel detection rate. It can provide an intuitive, sensitive and real-time methods for evaluation the anti-tumor effect of angiogenesis.
引文
1. Risau W. Mechanism of angiogenesis. Nature,1997; 386:671-674.
2. Wong ML, Prawira A, Kaye AH, Hovens CM.Tumour angiogenesis:its mechanism and therapeutic implications in malignant gliomas. J Clin Neurosci.2009; 16(9):1119-30
3. Loges S, Roncal C, Carmeliet P.Development of targeted angiogenic medicine. J Thromb Haemost.2009; 7(1):21-33.
4. Murdoch C, Muthana M, Coffelt SB, Lewis CE.The role of myeloid cells in the promotion of tumour angiogenesis. Nat Rev Cancer.2008; 8(8):618-31
5. Seiwert TY, Cohen EE.Targeting angiogenesis in head and neck cancer. Semin Oncol. 2008; 35(3):274-85.
6. Rosen L. Antiangiogenic strategies and agents in clinical trials. Oncologist.2000; 5(Suppl 1):20-27.
7. Folkman J, Beckner K. Angiogenesis imaging. Acad Radiol.2000; 7(10):783-5.
8. Sivridis E. Angiogenesis and endometrial cancer. Anticancer Res.2001; 21(6B): 4383-8.
9. Chaudhuri MM, Moscatelli D, Basilico C. Involvement of the conserved acidic amino acid domain of FGF receptor 1 in ligand-receptor interactions.J Cell Physiol,1993, 157:209-216.
10. Francavilla C, Cattaneo P, Berezin V, et al. The binding of NCAM to FGFR1 induces a specific cellular response mediated by receptor trafficking. J Cell Biol,2009,28; 187(7):1101-16.
11. Cao R, Xue Y, Hedlund EM, et al. VEGFR1-mediated pericyte ablation links VEGF and P1GF to cancer-associated retinopathy.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,2010,12; 107(2):856-61.
12. Turner N, Pearson A, Sharpe R, et al. FGFR1 Amplification drives endocrine therapy resistance and is a therapeutic target in breast cancer. Cancer Res,2010,70(5); 2085-94.
13. Wang Y, Becker D. Antisense targeting of basic fibroblast growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptor-1 in human melanomas blocks intratumoral angiogenesis and tumor growth. Nat Med,1997; 3(8):887-893.
14. Wang F, McKeehan K, Yu CD, et al. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 phosphotyro-sine 766 molecular target for prevention of progression of prostate tumors to malignancy. Cancer Res,2002; 62:1898-1903.
15. Huang X, Yu C, Jin C, et al. Ectopic activity of FGFR1 in hepatocytes accelerates hepatocarcinogenesis by driving proliferation and VEGF-induced angiogenesis. Cancer Res,2006; 66:1481-1490.
16. Zheng SP, Zhang JZ, Zheng SJ, Huang FY, Wu RL, Cao LM, Xie MX. Anti-angiogeneic target therapy for cancer with vaccine based on the recombinant chicken FGFR1 in tumor-bearing mice. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci,2007; 27(2):120-123.
17. Zheng SP, Zheng SJ, Wu RL, Huang FY, Jiao CL, ao LM. Enhanced efficacy in anti-tumour activity by combined therapy of recombinant FGFR1 related angiogenesis and low-dose cytotoxic agent. European Journal of Cancer,2007; 14(43):2134-2139.
18. Zheng SJ, Zheng SP, Huang FY, Jiao CL, Wu RL. Synergistic anti-tumor effect of recombinant chicken fibroblast growth factor receptor-1-mediated anti-angiogenesis and low-dose gemcitabine in a mouse colon adenocarcinoma model. World J Gastro-enterol,2007; 13(17):2484-2489.
19. Zheng SJ, Huang FY, Zheng SP, Wang W, Yin H, Wu RL. Vaccination with a recombinant chicken FGFR1 bypasses immunological tolerance against self-FGFR1 in mice. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci,2006; 26(4):389-391.
20. Hertel LW, Boder GB, Kroin JS, Rinzel SM, Poore GA, Todd GC, G rindey GB. Evaluation of the antitumor activity of gemcitabine (2-2-difluoro-2-deoxycytidine). Cancer Res,1990; 50:4417-44
21. Pauwels B, Vermorken JB, Wouters A, Ides J, Van Laere S, Lambrechts HA, Pattyn GG, Vermeulen K, Meijnders P, Lardon F.The role of apoptotic cell death in the radiosensitising effect of gemcitabine. Br J Cancer.2009,101(4):628-36.
22. Huanwen W, Zhiyong L, Xiaohua S, Xinyu R, Kai W, Tonghua L. Intrinsic chemoresistance to Gemcitabine is associated with constitutive and laminin-induced phosphorylation of FAK in pancreatic cancer cell lines. Mol Cancer.2009; 8:125.
23. Matsumoto K, Nagahara T, Okano J, Murawaki Y.The growth inhibition of hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma cells by gemcitabine and the roles of extracellular signal-regulated and checkpoint kinases.Oncol Rep.2008; 20(4):863-72
24. Plastaras JP, Cengel KA. Combination therapy with gemcitabine and 5-Fluorouracil: unblocking the pathways to survivin? Cancer Biol Ther.2006;5(11):1566-8.
25. Bruns CJ, Shrader M, Harbison MT, Portera C, Solorzano CC, Jauch KW, Hicklin DJ, Radinsky R, Ellis LM. Effect of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 antibody DC 101 plus gemcitabine on growth, metastasis and angiogenesis of human pancreatic cancer growing orthotopically in mice. Int J Cancer.2002; 102: 101-108.
26. Maximous DW, Abdel-Wanis ME, El-Sayed MI, Abd-Elsayed AA.Preoperative gemcitabine based chemo-radiotherapy in locally advanced non metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Int Arch Med.2009; 2(1):7.
27. Mauri D, Polyzos NP, Salanti G, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP.Multiple-treatments meta-analysis of chemotherapy and targeted therapies in advanced breast cancer./Natl Cancer Inst.2008; 100(24):1780-91
28.郑少江,黄风迎,郑少萍,王伟,吴人亮.鸡成纤维细胞生长因子Ⅰ型受体胞外段原核表达载体的构建及表达鉴定.华中科技大学学报(医学版),2006；35(4)：433-435.
29. Weltzin R, Guy B, Thomas WD Jr, Giannasca PJ, Monath TP. Parenteral adjuvant act- ivities of Escherichia coli heat-labile toxin and its B subunit for immunization of mice against gastric Helicobacter pylori infection. Infect Immun,2000,68(5):2775-2782.
30. Blezinger P, Wang J, Gondo M, Quezada A, Mehrens D, French M, Singhal A, Sullivan S, Rolland A, Ralston R, Min W. Systemic inhibition of tumor growth and tumor metastases by intramuscular administration of the endostatin gene. Nat Biotechnol,1999; 17:343-348.
31.J.萨姆布鲁克,E.F.弗里奇,T.曼尼阿蒂斯著.金冬雁,等,译.分子克隆实验指南(第二版).北京：科学出版社,1999年.
32. Czerkinsky CC, Nilsson LA, Nygren H, Ouchterlony O, Tarkowski A. A solid-phase enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay for enumeration of specific antibody-secreting cells. J Immunol Methods.1983; 65:109-121.
33. Wild R, Ramakrishnan S, Sedgewick J, Griffioen AW. Quantitative assessment of angiogenesis and tumor vessel architecture by computerassisted digital image analysis: effects of VEGF-toxin conjugate on tumor microvessel density. Microvasc Res,2000; 59:368-376.
34. Dings RP, Yokoyama Y, Ramakrishnan S, Griffioen AW, Mayo KH. The designed angiostatic peptide anginex synergistically improves chemotherapy and antiangio-genesis therapy with angiostatin. Cancer Res,2003; 63:382-385.
35. Shervington A, Lu C. Expression of multidrug resistance genes in normal and cancer stem cells. Cancer Invest 2008,26(5):535-542.
36. Boehm T, Folkman J, Browder T, O'Reilly MS. Antiangiogenic therapy of experi-mental cancer does not induce acquired drug resistance. Nature,1997,390:404-407.
37. Sugarbaker PH. Reported Impact of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intrape-ritoneal Chemotherapy on Systemic Toxicity. Annals of Surgical Oncology,2008, 15:1800-1801.
38. Wachsberger P, Burd R, Dicker AP.Tumor response to ionizing radiation combined with antiangiogenesis or vascular targeting agents:exploring mechanisms of interaction. Clin Cancer Res.2003; 9(6):1957-71.
39. Yoon SS, Stangenberg L, Lee YJ, Rothrock C, Dreyfuss JM, Baek KH, Waterman PR, Nielsen GP, Weissleder R, Mahmood U, Park PJ, Jacks T, Dodd RD, Fisher CJ, Ryeom S, Kirsch DGEfficacy of sunitinib and radiotherapy in genetically engineered mouse model of soft-tissue sarcoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.2009; 74(4):1207-16.
40. Sweeney CJ, Miller KD, Sissons SE, Nozaki S, Heiman DK, Shen J, Sledge GW. The antiangiogenic property of docetaxel is synergistic wtih a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor or 2-methoxysetradiol but antagonized by endothelial growth factors. Cancer Res,2001; 61:3369-3372
41. Marten A, Schmidt J, Ose J, Harig S, Abel U, Munter MW, Jager D, Friess H, Mayerle J, Adler G, Seufferlein T, Gress T, Schmid R, Buchler MW.A randomized multicentre phase Ⅱ trial comparing adjuvant therapy in patients with interferon alpha-2b and 5-FU alone or in combination with either external radiation treatment and cisplatin (CapRI) or radiation alone regarding event-free survival-CapRI-2. BMC Cancer. 2009; 9:160
1.孙慧勤,邹仲敏,卞修武,等.正常血管和肿瘤血管生成的调节机制研究进展.中华病理学杂志,2000,29(6)：224-226.
2. Weidner N, Semple J P, Welch WR, et al.Tumor angiogenesis and Metastases correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. New Engl JMed,1991,324:1-8.
3. Fanelli M, Locopo N, Gattuso D, et al. Assessment of tumor vasculariza-tion: immunohistochemical and non-invasive methods. Int J Biol Markers.1999,14: 218-231.
4.吕清,袁莉,王新房,等.高频超声结合eFlow显像评价系统性红斑狼疮患者指端微血管血流的初步探讨.中国医学影像技术,2006,22(10)：1570-1572.
5. Alder DD, Cason PL, Rubin, et al. Doppler ultrasound color flow image in the stage of breast cancer:prelimary findings. Ultrasound MedBiol,1990,16(2):553-559.
6.韩曼宇,曾昭炜.肿瘤微循环研究的进展.微循环学杂志,1997,7(2)：22-23.
7. Folkman J. Tumor or angigenesis:therapeutic implications. New Engl JMed,1991, 285(5):1182-1189.
8. Pepper. Manipulating angiogenesis from basis science to the bed side. Arterioscler Thomb Vasc Biol,1997,17(4):605-619.
9. Huang, X., C. Yu, C. Jin, M. Kobayashi, C.A. Bowles, F. Wang, and W.L. McKeehan. Ectopic activity of FGFR1 in hepatocytes accelerates hepatocarcino-genesis by driving proliferation and VEGF-induced angio-genesis. Cancer Res,2006; 66: 1481-1490.
10. Sehgal CM, Arger PH, Rowling SE, et al. Quantitative vascularity of breast masses by Doppler imaging:Regional Variations and diagnostic implications. J Ultrasound Med,2000,9 (7):427-440.
11. Meyerowitz CB, Fleischer AC, Pickens DR, et al. Quantification of tumor vascularity and flow with amplitude color Doppler sonography in an experimental model: Preliminary results. J Ultrasound Med,1996,15(12):827-833.
12.荣雪余,杨堤,姜玉新.乳腺肿块的能量多普勒血流定量与病理微血管定量相关性.中国医学影像技术,2002,18(7)：660-663.
13. KRALL W J, SRAMEK J J, CU TL ER N R. Cholinesterase inhibitors:a t herapeutic st rategy for Alzheimer disease [J].Ann Pharmacot her,1999,33 (4):4412450.
14.王泓,曹铁生,乐桂容,等.增强超声诊断小乳腺癌及评价血管生成活性的价值.中国医学影像技术,2005,21(10)：151921521.
15. Zheng SP, Zhang JZ, Zheng SJ, Huang FY, Wu RL, Cao LM, Xie MX. Anti-angiogeneic target therapy for cancer with vaccine based on the recombinant chicken FGFR1 in tumor-bearing mice. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci, 2007; 27(2):120-123.
16. Zheng SP, Zheng SJ, Wu RL, Huang FY, Jiao CL, Cao LM. Enhanced efficacy in anti-tumour activity by combined therapy of recombinant FGFR1 related angio-genesis and low-dose cytotoxic agent. European Journal of Cancer,2007,14(43): 2134-2139.
17. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Color Doppler sonography of breast masses:a multiparameter analysis. Clin Radiology,1997,52 (1):917-923.
18. LI Wenying, CHEN Yaqing WU Songsong. Power Doppler ultra-sonography of breast tumor vascularities:accuracy and source of error. Chin J Med Imaging Technol,2007,23 (11):1615-1617.
1. Weidner N,Semple JP,Wel WR,et al. Tumor angiogenesis and metastases correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. New Engl J Med,1991,324:1-8.
2. Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis:the rapeutic implications. New Engl J Med,1971, 285(21):1182-1186.
3. Cosgrove D,Eclersley R,Blomley M,et al. Quantification of blood flow. Eur Radiol, 2001,11:1338-1344.
4. ZHENCYY, WANGZG, RANHT, et al. Diagnostic ultrasound and contrast micro-bubbles on new capillaries. Chin JMed Imaging Technol.2004,20 (3):349-351.
5. TER HAAR GR.Ultrasonic contrast agents:safey considerations reviewed, Eur J Radiol,2002,41(3):217-221.
6. Carmeliet P, Jain RK. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature,2000,407: 249-257.
7. Jensen JA, Holm O, Jensen LJ, et al. Ultrasound research scallner for real-time syn-thetic aperture data acquisition. IEEE transactions on ultra-sonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control,2005,52(5):881-891.
8. Padhani AR,Neeman M. Challenges for imaging angiogenesis.BJR,2001,74:886-890.
9. Toyoda H,Kumuda T,Nakano S,et al. Significance of tumor Vascularity as a pre-dicttor of long-term prognosis in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma treated by percutaneous ethanol injection therapy. J Hepatol,1997,26:1055-1062.
10. Hlatky L,Hahnfeldt P,Folkman J. Clinical application of anti-angiogenic therapy: microvessel density,what it does and doesn't tell US. J National Cancer Institute,2002,94(12):883-893.
11. Yeh CK,Ferrara KW,Kruse DE. High-resolutiong functional vascular assessment with ultrasound. IEEE Transactions on medical imaging,2004,23(10):1263-1275.
12.超声造影对小鼠肝癌模型肿瘤内微血管血流灌注定量研究的初步探讨.Shanghai Medical Imaging,2001,,Vol.16,No.4:318-322.
13.晏春根,夏国园.超声微泡造影剂与靶向治疗.现代实用医学.200517(11)：723-724.
14. Dijkmans PA,Juffermans LM,Musters RJ,et al. Micro-bubbles and ultrasound:from diagnosis to therapy. Eur JEchocardiograph,2004,5(3),245-256.
15. ROS E, AL EU J, GOMEZ DE ARANDA I, et al. Effect s of bis (7)2tacrine on spontaneous synaptic activity and on t he nicotinic ACh receptor of Torpedo elect ric organ [J]. J Neuro-physiol,2001,86 (1):1832189.
16.夏国园,苏巧荣.诊断级超声对活鼠胚胎生物学效应的研究进展.实用放射学杂志,2004,20(6)：554-555.
17. KobayashiN,Yasu T,Yamada S,et al. Endothelial cell injury invenule and capillary induced by contrast ultrasonography. Ultra-soundMed Biol,2002,28(7):949-956.
18. BekeredjianR,Grayburn PA,ShohetR. Use of ultrasound contrast agents for gene or drug delivery in cardio vascular medicine. J Am CollCardio,2005,45(3):329-335.
19. LI C Y, WANG H, XUE H, et al. Bis (7)2tacrine, a novel dimeric AChE inhibitor, is a potent GABA(A) receptor antagonist [J]. Neuroreport,1999,10 (4):7952800.
20. MaruyamaH,MatsutaniS,SaishoH,et al. Different behaviors of mic-robubbles in the liver:time-related quantitative analysis of two ultrasound contrastagents,levovistand definity. Ultrasound Med Biol,2004,30(8):1035-1040.
21.冉海涛,任红,王志刚.超声波、超声造影剂与基因转染.中华超声影像学杂志,2003,12(7)：441-442.
22. Rizzatto G Towards a more sophisticated use of breast ultrasoun.Eur Radiol,2001 (11):2425-2435.
23. Kim A Y,Choi B I,Kim T K,et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced fundamental imaging,second-harmonic imaging and pulse inversion harmonic imaging. Invest Radiol,2001,36 (10):582-588.
24.乳腺肿瘤超声造影与微血管密度相关性的研究。姜燕茹,唐建武，夏稻子等。医学
与哲学(临床决策论坛版),2007,28(3)：31-33.
25. Tanaka S, Kitamuka T, FujitaM, et al. Color Doppler flow imaging of liver tumors. AJR,1990,154:509-514.
26.卞爱娜,高云华,夏红梅等.免疫脂质体超声造影剂增强荷肝癌小鼠肿瘤显像的实验研究.中国超声医学杂志,2005,21(6)：413-416.
27.王文平,齐青,季正标等.经周围静脉超声造影在肝内占位病变中的初步应用。上海医学,2000,23(9)：522-524.
1. Tsutsui JM, Grayburn PA, Xie F, et a.1 Drug and gene delivery and enhancement of thrombolysis using ultrasound and microbubbles.CardiolClin,2004,22(2):299-312.
2. 晏春根,夏国园.超声微泡造影剂与靶向治疗.现代实用医学,2005,17(11)：723-724.
3. Lindner JR, Song J, Xu F, et al. Noninvasive ultrasound imaging of inflammation using microbubble targeted to activated leukocytes. Cir-culation,2000,102(22): 2745-2750.
4.夏国园,苏巧荣.诊断级超声对活鼠胚胎生物学效应的研究进展.实用放射学杂志,2004,20(6)：554-555.
5. Dayton PA, Ferrara KW. Targeted imaging using ultrasound. JMagn Re-son Imaging, 2002,16(4):362-377.
6. MorawskiAM, LanzaGA, W ickline SA. Targeted contrastagents formag-netic reson-ance imaging and ultrasound. CurrOpin Biotechnol,2005,16(1):89-92.
7. Huang SL, Hamilton AJ, Nagaraj A, et al. Improving ultrasound reflectivity and stability of echogenic liposomal dispersionsfor use astargeted ultrasound contrast agents. JPharm Sci,2001,90(12):1917-1926.
8. Schumann PA, Christiansen JP, Quigley RM, et al. Targeted microbubble binding se-lectively to GPⅡb Ⅲa receptors of plateletthrombi.Invest Radiol,2002,37(11):587-593.
9.梁海东,王兴华.超声微泡造影影像学及治疗作用的研究进展.中华医学超声杂志,2004,11(1)：3.
10. Nakaya H, Shimizu T, Isobe K, et al. Microbubble-enhanced ultrasound exposure promotes uptake of methotrexate into synovialcells and enhanced antiinflammatory effects in the knees of rabbitswith antigen-induced arthritis. Arthritis Rheum,2005, 52(8):2559-2566
11. Lanza GM, Wallace KD, ScottMJ, et al. Anovel site-targeted ultrasonic contrast agent with broad biomedical application. Circulation,1996,94(12):3334-3340.
12. HughesMS, Marsh JN, Hall CS, et al. Acoustic characterization in whole blood and plasma of site-targeted nanoparticle ultrasound contrast agent for molecular imaging. Acoust Soc Am,2005,117(12):964-972.
13. UngerEC, Matsunaga TO, McCreery T, et al. Therapeutic applica-tions of micro-bubbles. EurJRadiol,2002,42 (1):160-168.
14. Yamada S, Komuro K, Mikami T, et al. Novel quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion by harmonic power Doppler imaging during myocardial contrast echo-cardiography. Heart,2005,91(2):183-188.
15. Schwenger V, Korosoglou G, Hinkel UP, et al. Real-time contrast enhanced sono-graphy of renal transplant recipients predicts chronical-lograft nephropathy. AmJ Transplant,2006,6(3):609-615.
16. Lanza GM, Abendschein DR, Hall CS, et al. In vivo molecular imaging of stretch-induced tissue factor in carotid arteries with ligand-targeted nanoparticles. AmSoc Echocardiogr,2000,13(6):608-614.
17. Klibanov AL. Microbubble contrast agents:targeted ultrasoundimaging and ultra-sound-assisted drug-delivery applications. InvestRadiol,2006,41(3):354-362.
18. Miao CH, Brayman AA, Loeb KR, et al. Ultrasound enhances gene delivery of human factor IX plasmid. Hum Gene Ther,2005,16(7):893-905.
19. Chen S, Shohet RV, Bekeredjian R, et al. Optimization of ultrasound parameters for cardiac gene delivery of adenoviral or plasmid deoxyribo nucleicacid by ultrasound-targeted microbubble destruction. JAmColl Cardiol,2003,42(2):301-308.
20.程文,张青萍,贡雪灏,等.超声引导下瘤体内注入超声造影剂和p53基因治疗大鼠肝癌的初步研究.中华超声影像学杂志,2004,13(7)：543-546.
21. McDannold N, Vykhodtseva N, Hynynen K. Targeted disruption of the blood-brain barrier with focused ultrasound:association withcavitation activity. Phys Med Biol, 2006,51(4):793-807.
22. Seidel G, Claassen L, Meyer K, et al. Evaluation of blood flow in the cerebral micro-circulation:analysis of the refill kinetics during ultrasound contrast agent infusion. Ultrasound Med Biol,2001,27(8):1059-1064.
23. Darge K, Moeller RT, Trusen A, et al. Diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux with low-dose contrast enhanced harmonic ultrasound imaging. Pediatr Radiol,2005,35(1): 73-78.
24.李奇林.超声微泡造影剂的临床应用及研究进展.Foreign Medical Sciences Clinical Radiological Fascicle,2006, Nov.29(6):419-421
1.周永昌,郭万学,主编.超声医学[M].第5版.北京：科学技术文献出版社,2006.1005.
2. Kessler N, Cyteval C, Gallix B, et al. Appendicitis:evaluation of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of US, Doppler US, and laboratory findings. Radiology,2004; 230:472-478. (PMID:14688403)
3.王金锐,曹海根.实用腹部超声诊断学[M].北京：人民卫生出版社,2006：414-417.
4. Leslie M. Scoutt,, Steven R. Sawyers, Jamal Bokhari, et al. Ultrasound Evaluation of the Acute Abdomen. Ultrasound Clin 2007; 2:493-523 (This article is not cited in Pubmed)(http://www. mdconsult. com/das/article/body/177812682-2/jorg=journal & source=&sp= 20204737&sid=0/N/621541/1.html?issn=1556-858X)
5.李睿,陈滔.彩超在小儿外科急腹症诊断中的应用价值[J].西部医学,2008；20(6)：1269-1270.
6.夏焙,吴瑛.小儿超声诊断学[M].北京：人民卫生出版社,2001：318.
7. Kaiser S, Jorulf H, Soderman E, et al. Impact of radiologic imaging on the surgical deci-sion making process in suspected appendicitis in children. Acad Radiol,2004; 11(9):971-979. (PMID:15350578)
8.桂新,马桂英,杨江娟,等.肠套叠彩色超声诊断的临床意义[J].实用儿科临床杂志,2004,19(7)：603.
9. 张莉.成人小肠套叠的超声诊断[J].中国超声医学杂志,1999,15(4)：692-694.
10. Orzech N, Navarro O, Langer J. Is ultrasonography a good screening test for intestinal malrotation?J Pediatr Surg,2006; 41(5):1005-1009. (PMID:16677901)
11. Patino MO, Munden MM. Utility of sonographic whirlpool sign in diagnosing midgut volvulus in patients with atypical clinical presentations. J Ultrasound Med,2004; 23(3):397-401. (PMID:15055787)
12.丁玫.肠梗阻超声影像分析[J].医药论坛杂志,2008,29(12)：97-98.
13.张健,段志泉,罗英伟,等.急性肠系膜上静脉血栓形成的诊治分析.中华普通外科杂志,2005,20(1)：21-23.
14.段志泉,孙成林.肠系膜静脉血栓形成的诊断与治疗.中华医学杂志,2004,84(18)：1572-1574
15. Maconi G, Radice E, Greco A, et al. Bowel ultrasound in Crohn's disease. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2006; 20:93-112. (PMID:16473803)
16. Sung T, Callahan M, Taylor GA. Clinical and imaging mimickers of acute appendicitis in the pediatric population. AJR Am J Roentgenol,2006; 186(1):167-174. (PMID:16357381)
17. Rathaus V, Shapiro M, Grunebaum M, et al. Enlarged mesenteric lymph nodes in asymp-tomatic children:the value of the finding in various imaging modalities. Br J Radiol,2005; 78(925):30-33. (PMID:15673526)
18.秦达,张武,译.急腹症的超声检查：胃肠部分[J/CD].中华医学超声杂志：电子版,2008,5(1)：165-184.
19.刘明瑜,何小梅,樊文峰,等.超声对阑尾炎病变的诊断价值[J].中国超声医学杂志,2003,19(7)：536.
20. Sorantin E, Lindbichler F. Management of Intussusception. Eur Radiol,2004; (Suppl 4):L 146-154. (PMID:14752570)
21. Lee JH, Choi SH, Jeong YK, et al. Intermittent sonographic guidance in air enema for re-duction of childhood intussusception. J Ultrasound Med,2006; 25(9):1125-1130. (PMID:16929012)
22. Cerro P, Magrini P, Porcari P, et al. Sonographic diagnosis of intussusceptions in adults[J]. Abdom Imaging,2000,25(1):45-47. (PMID:10652920)
2. Wong ML, Prawira A, Kaye AH, Hovens CM.Tumour angiogenesis:its mechanism and therapeutic implications in malignant gliomas. J Clin Neurosci.2009; 16(9):1119-30
3. Loges S, Roncal C, Carmeliet P.Development of targeted angiogenic medicine. J Thromb Haemost.2009; 7(1):21-33.
4. Murdoch C, Muthana M, Coffelt SB, Lewis CE.The role of myeloid cells in the promotion of tumour angiogenesis. Nat Rev Cancer.2008; 8(8):618-31
5. Seiwert TY, Cohen EE.Targeting angiogenesis in head and neck cancer. Semin Oncol. 2008; 35(3):274-85.
6. Rosen L. Antiangiogenic strategies and agents in clinical trials. Oncologist.2000; 5(Suppl 1):20-27.
7. Folkman J, Beckner K. Angiogenesis imaging. Acad Radiol.2000; 7(10):783-5.
8. Sivridis E. Angiogenesis and endometrial cancer. Anticancer Res.2001; 21(6B): 4383-8.
9. Chaudhuri MM, Moscatelli D, Basilico C. Involvement of the conserved acidic amino acid domain of FGF receptor 1 in ligand-receptor interactions.J Cell Physiol,1993, 157:209-216.
10. Francavilla C, Cattaneo P, Berezin V, et al. The binding of NCAM to FGFR1 induces a specific cellular response mediated by receptor trafficking. J Cell Biol,2009,28; 187(7):1101-16.
11. Cao R, Xue Y, Hedlund EM, et al. VEGFR1-mediated pericyte ablation links VEGF and P1GF to cancer-associated retinopathy.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,2010,12; 107(2):856-61.
12. Turner N, Pearson A, Sharpe R, et al. FGFR1 Amplification drives endocrine therapy resistance and is a therapeutic target in breast cancer. Cancer Res,2010,70(5); 2085-94.
13. Wang Y, Becker D. Antisense targeting of basic fibroblast growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptor-1 in human melanomas blocks intratumoral angiogenesis and tumor growth. Nat Med,1997; 3(8):887-893.
14. Wang F, McKeehan K, Yu CD, et al. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 phosphotyro-sine 766 molecular target for prevention of progression of prostate tumors to malignancy. Cancer Res,2002; 62:1898-1903.
15. Huang X, Yu C, Jin C, et al. Ectopic activity of FGFR1 in hepatocytes accelerates hepatocarcinogenesis by driving proliferation and VEGF-induced angiogenesis. Cancer Res,2006; 66:1481-1490.
16. Zheng SP, Zhang JZ, Zheng SJ, Huang FY, Wu RL, Cao LM, Xie MX. Anti-angiogeneic target therapy for cancer with vaccine based on the recombinant chicken FGFR1 in tumor-bearing mice. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci,2007; 27(2):120-123.
17. Zheng SP, Zheng SJ, Wu RL, Huang FY, Jiao CL, ao LM. Enhanced efficacy in anti-tumour activity by combined therapy of recombinant FGFR1 related angiogenesis and low-dose cytotoxic agent. European Journal of Cancer,2007; 14(43):2134-2139.
18. Zheng SJ, Zheng SP, Huang FY, Jiao CL, Wu RL. Synergistic anti-tumor effect of recombinant chicken fibroblast growth factor receptor-1-mediated anti-angiogenesis and low-dose gemcitabine in a mouse colon adenocarcinoma model. World J Gastro-enterol,2007; 13(17):2484-2489.
19. Zheng SJ, Huang FY, Zheng SP, Wang W, Yin H, Wu RL. Vaccination with a recombinant chicken FGFR1 bypasses immunological tolerance against self-FGFR1 in mice. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci,2006; 26(4):389-391.
20. Hertel LW, Boder GB, Kroin JS, Rinzel SM, Poore GA, Todd GC, G rindey GB. Evaluation of the antitumor activity of gemcitabine (2-2-difluoro-2-deoxycytidine). Cancer Res,1990; 50:4417-44
21. Pauwels B, Vermorken JB, Wouters A, Ides J, Van Laere S, Lambrechts HA, Pattyn GG, Vermeulen K, Meijnders P, Lardon F.The role of apoptotic cell death in the radiosensitising effect of gemcitabine. Br J Cancer.2009,101(4):628-36.
22. Huanwen W, Zhiyong L, Xiaohua S, Xinyu R, Kai W, Tonghua L. Intrinsic chemoresistance to Gemcitabine is associated with constitutive and laminin-induced phosphorylation of FAK in pancreatic cancer cell lines. Mol Cancer.2009; 8:125.
23. Matsumoto K, Nagahara T, Okano J, Murawaki Y.The growth inhibition of hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma cells by gemcitabine and the roles of extracellular signal-regulated and checkpoint kinases.Oncol Rep.2008; 20(4):863-72
24. Plastaras JP, Cengel KA. Combination therapy with gemcitabine and 5-Fluorouracil: unblocking the pathways to survivin? Cancer Biol Ther.2006;5(11):1566-8.
25. Bruns CJ, Shrader M, Harbison MT, Portera C, Solorzano CC, Jauch KW, Hicklin DJ, Radinsky R, Ellis LM. Effect of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 antibody DC 101 plus gemcitabine on growth, metastasis and angiogenesis of human pancreatic cancer growing orthotopically in mice. Int J Cancer.2002; 102: 101-108.
26. Maximous DW, Abdel-Wanis ME, El-Sayed MI, Abd-Elsayed AA.Preoperative gemcitabine based chemo-radiotherapy in locally advanced non metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Int Arch Med.2009; 2(1):7.
27. Mauri D, Polyzos NP, Salanti G, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP.Multiple-treatments meta-analysis of chemotherapy and targeted therapies in advanced breast cancer./Natl Cancer Inst.2008; 100(24):1780-91
28.郑少江,黄风迎,郑少萍,王伟,吴人亮.鸡成纤维细胞生长因子Ⅰ型受体胞外段原核表达载体的构建及表达鉴定.华中科技大学学报(医学版),2006；35(4)：433-435.
29. Weltzin R, Guy B, Thomas WD Jr, Giannasca PJ, Monath TP. Parenteral adjuvant act- ivities of Escherichia coli heat-labile toxin and its B subunit for immunization of mice against gastric Helicobacter pylori infection. Infect Immun,2000,68(5):2775-2782.
30. Blezinger P, Wang J, Gondo M, Quezada A, Mehrens D, French M, Singhal A, Sullivan S, Rolland A, Ralston R, Min W. Systemic inhibition of tumor growth and tumor metastases by intramuscular administration of the endostatin gene. Nat Biotechnol,1999; 17:343-348.
31.J.萨姆布鲁克,E.F.弗里奇,T.曼尼阿蒂斯著.金冬雁,等,译.分子克隆实验指南(第二版).北京：科学出版社,1999年.
32. Czerkinsky CC, Nilsson LA, Nygren H, Ouchterlony O, Tarkowski A. A solid-phase enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay for enumeration of specific antibody-secreting cells. J Immunol Methods.1983; 65:109-121.
33. Wild R, Ramakrishnan S, Sedgewick J, Griffioen AW. Quantitative assessment of angiogenesis and tumor vessel architecture by computerassisted digital image analysis: effects of VEGF-toxin conjugate on tumor microvessel density. Microvasc Res,2000; 59:368-376.
34. Dings RP, Yokoyama Y, Ramakrishnan S, Griffioen AW, Mayo KH. The designed angiostatic peptide anginex synergistically improves chemotherapy and antiangio-genesis therapy with angiostatin. Cancer Res,2003; 63:382-385.
35. Shervington A, Lu C. Expression of multidrug resistance genes in normal and cancer stem cells. Cancer Invest 2008,26(5):535-542.
36. Boehm T, Folkman J, Browder T, O'Reilly MS. Antiangiogenic therapy of experi-mental cancer does not induce acquired drug resistance. Nature,1997,390:404-407.
37. Sugarbaker PH. Reported Impact of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intrape-ritoneal Chemotherapy on Systemic Toxicity. Annals of Surgical Oncology,2008, 15:1800-1801.
38. Wachsberger P, Burd R, Dicker AP.Tumor response to ionizing radiation combined with antiangiogenesis or vascular targeting agents:exploring mechanisms of interaction. Clin Cancer Res.2003; 9(6):1957-71.
39. Yoon SS, Stangenberg L, Lee YJ, Rothrock C, Dreyfuss JM, Baek KH, Waterman PR, Nielsen GP, Weissleder R, Mahmood U, Park PJ, Jacks T, Dodd RD, Fisher CJ, Ryeom S, Kirsch DGEfficacy of sunitinib and radiotherapy in genetically engineered mouse model of soft-tissue sarcoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.2009; 74(4):1207-16.
40. Sweeney CJ, Miller KD, Sissons SE, Nozaki S, Heiman DK, Shen J, Sledge GW. The antiangiogenic property of docetaxel is synergistic wtih a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor or 2-methoxysetradiol but antagonized by endothelial growth factors. Cancer Res,2001; 61:3369-3372
41. Marten A, Schmidt J, Ose J, Harig S, Abel U, Munter MW, Jager D, Friess H, Mayerle J, Adler G, Seufferlein T, Gress T, Schmid R, Buchler MW.A randomized multicentre phase Ⅱ trial comparing adjuvant therapy in patients with interferon alpha-2b and 5-FU alone or in combination with either external radiation treatment and cisplatin (CapRI) or radiation alone regarding event-free survival-CapRI-2. BMC Cancer. 2009; 9:160
1.孙慧勤,邹仲敏,卞修武,等.正常血管和肿瘤血管生成的调节机制研究进展.中华病理学杂志,2000,29(6)：224-226.
2. Weidner N, Semple J P, Welch WR, et al.Tumor angiogenesis and Metastases correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. New Engl JMed,1991,324:1-8.
3. Fanelli M, Locopo N, Gattuso D, et al. Assessment of tumor vasculariza-tion: immunohistochemical and non-invasive methods. Int J Biol Markers.1999,14: 218-231.
4.吕清,袁莉,王新房,等.高频超声结合eFlow显像评价系统性红斑狼疮患者指端微血管血流的初步探讨.中国医学影像技术,2006,22(10)：1570-1572.
5. Alder DD, Cason PL, Rubin, et al. Doppler ultrasound color flow image in the stage of breast cancer:prelimary findings. Ultrasound MedBiol,1990,16(2):553-559.
6.韩曼宇,曾昭炜.肿瘤微循环研究的进展.微循环学杂志,1997,7(2)：22-23.
7. Folkman J. Tumor or angigenesis:therapeutic implications. New Engl JMed,1991, 285(5):1182-1189.
8. Pepper. Manipulating angiogenesis from basis science to the bed side. Arterioscler Thomb Vasc Biol,1997,17(4):605-619.
9. Huang, X., C. Yu, C. Jin, M. Kobayashi, C.A. Bowles, F. Wang, and W.L. McKeehan. Ectopic activity of FGFR1 in hepatocytes accelerates hepatocarcino-genesis by driving proliferation and VEGF-induced angio-genesis. Cancer Res,2006; 66: 1481-1490.
10. Sehgal CM, Arger PH, Rowling SE, et al. Quantitative vascularity of breast masses by Doppler imaging:Regional Variations and diagnostic implications. J Ultrasound Med,2000,9 (7):427-440.
11. Meyerowitz CB, Fleischer AC, Pickens DR, et al. Quantification of tumor vascularity and flow with amplitude color Doppler sonography in an experimental model: Preliminary results. J Ultrasound Med,1996,15(12):827-833.
12.荣雪余,杨堤,姜玉新.乳腺肿块的能量多普勒血流定量与病理微血管定量相关性.中国医学影像技术,2002,18(7)：660-663.
13. KRALL W J, SRAMEK J J, CU TL ER N R. Cholinesterase inhibitors:a t herapeutic st rategy for Alzheimer disease [J].Ann Pharmacot her,1999,33 (4):4412450.
14.王泓,曹铁生,乐桂容,等.增强超声诊断小乳腺癌及评价血管生成活性的价值.中国医学影像技术,2005,21(10)：151921521.
15. Zheng SP, Zhang JZ, Zheng SJ, Huang FY, Wu RL, Cao LM, Xie MX. Anti-angiogeneic target therapy for cancer with vaccine based on the recombinant chicken FGFR1 in tumor-bearing mice. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci, 2007; 27(2):120-123.
16. Zheng SP, Zheng SJ, Wu RL, Huang FY, Jiao CL, Cao LM. Enhanced efficacy in anti-tumour activity by combined therapy of recombinant FGFR1 related angio-genesis and low-dose cytotoxic agent. European Journal of Cancer,2007,14(43): 2134-2139.
17. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Color Doppler sonography of breast masses:a multiparameter analysis. Clin Radiology,1997,52 (1):917-923.
18. LI Wenying, CHEN Yaqing WU Songsong. Power Doppler ultra-sonography of breast tumor vascularities:accuracy and source of error. Chin J Med Imaging Technol,2007,23 (11):1615-1617.
1. Weidner N,Semple JP,Wel WR,et al. Tumor angiogenesis and metastases correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. New Engl J Med,1991,324:1-8.
2. Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis:the rapeutic implications. New Engl J Med,1971, 285(21):1182-1186.
3. Cosgrove D,Eclersley R,Blomley M,et al. Quantification of blood flow. Eur Radiol, 2001,11:1338-1344.
4. ZHENCYY, WANGZG, RANHT, et al. Diagnostic ultrasound and contrast micro-bubbles on new capillaries. Chin JMed Imaging Technol.2004,20 (3):349-351.
5. TER HAAR GR.Ultrasonic contrast agents:safey considerations reviewed, Eur J Radiol,2002,41(3):217-221.
6. Carmeliet P, Jain RK. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature,2000,407: 249-257.
7. Jensen JA, Holm O, Jensen LJ, et al. Ultrasound research scallner for real-time syn-thetic aperture data acquisition. IEEE transactions on ultra-sonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control,2005,52(5):881-891.
8. Padhani AR,Neeman M. Challenges for imaging angiogenesis.BJR,2001,74:886-890.
9. Toyoda H,Kumuda T,Nakano S,et al. Significance of tumor Vascularity as a pre-dicttor of long-term prognosis in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma treated by percutaneous ethanol injection therapy. J Hepatol,1997,26:1055-1062.
10. Hlatky L,Hahnfeldt P,Folkman J. Clinical application of anti-angiogenic therapy: microvessel density,what it does and doesn't tell US. J National Cancer Institute,2002,94(12):883-893.
11. Yeh CK,Ferrara KW,Kruse DE. High-resolutiong functional vascular assessment with ultrasound. IEEE Transactions on medical imaging,2004,23(10):1263-1275.
12.超声造影对小鼠肝癌模型肿瘤内微血管血流灌注定量研究的初步探讨.Shanghai Medical Imaging,2001,,Vol.16,No.4:318-322.
13.晏春根,夏国园.超声微泡造影剂与靶向治疗.现代实用医学.200517(11)：723-724.
14. Dijkmans PA,Juffermans LM,Musters RJ,et al. Micro-bubbles and ultrasound:from diagnosis to therapy. Eur JEchocardiograph,2004,5(3),245-256.
15. ROS E, AL EU J, GOMEZ DE ARANDA I, et al. Effect s of bis (7)2tacrine on spontaneous synaptic activity and on t he nicotinic ACh receptor of Torpedo elect ric organ [J]. J Neuro-physiol,2001,86 (1):1832189.
16.夏国园,苏巧荣.诊断级超声对活鼠胚胎生物学效应的研究进展.实用放射学杂志,2004,20(6)：554-555.
17. KobayashiN,Yasu T,Yamada S,et al. Endothelial cell injury invenule and capillary induced by contrast ultrasonography. Ultra-soundMed Biol,2002,28(7):949-956.
18. BekeredjianR,Grayburn PA,ShohetR. Use of ultrasound contrast agents for gene or drug delivery in cardio vascular medicine. J Am CollCardio,2005,45(3):329-335.
19. LI C Y, WANG H, XUE H, et al. Bis (7)2tacrine, a novel dimeric AChE inhibitor, is a potent GABA(A) receptor antagonist [J]. Neuroreport,1999,10 (4):7952800.
20. MaruyamaH,MatsutaniS,SaishoH,et al. Different behaviors of mic-robubbles in the liver:time-related quantitative analysis of two ultrasound contrastagents,levovistand definity. Ultrasound Med Biol,2004,30(8):1035-1040.
21.冉海涛,任红,王志刚.超声波、超声造影剂与基因转染.中华超声影像学杂志,2003,12(7)：441-442.
22. Rizzatto G Towards a more sophisticated use of breast ultrasoun.Eur Radiol,2001 (11):2425-2435.
23. Kim A Y,Choi B I,Kim T K,et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced fundamental imaging,second-harmonic imaging and pulse inversion harmonic imaging. Invest Radiol,2001,36 (10):582-588.
24.乳腺肿瘤超声造影与微血管密度相关性的研究。姜燕茹,唐建武，夏稻子等。医学
与哲学(临床决策论坛版),2007,28(3)：31-33.
25. Tanaka S, Kitamuka T, FujitaM, et al. Color Doppler flow imaging of liver tumors. AJR,1990,154:509-514.
26.卞爱娜,高云华,夏红梅等.免疫脂质体超声造影剂增强荷肝癌小鼠肿瘤显像的实验研究.中国超声医学杂志,2005,21(6)：413-416.
27.王文平,齐青,季正标等.经周围静脉超声造影在肝内占位病变中的初步应用。上海医学,2000,23(9)：522-524.
1. Tsutsui JM, Grayburn PA, Xie F, et a.1 Drug and gene delivery and enhancement of thrombolysis using ultrasound and microbubbles.CardiolClin,2004,22(2):299-312.
2. 晏春根,夏国园.超声微泡造影剂与靶向治疗.现代实用医学,2005,17(11)：723-724.
3. Lindner JR, Song J, Xu F, et al. Noninvasive ultrasound imaging of inflammation using microbubble targeted to activated leukocytes. Cir-culation,2000,102(22): 2745-2750.
4.夏国园,苏巧荣.诊断级超声对活鼠胚胎生物学效应的研究进展.实用放射学杂志,2004,20(6)：554-555.
5. Dayton PA, Ferrara KW. Targeted imaging using ultrasound. JMagn Re-son Imaging, 2002,16(4):362-377.
6. MorawskiAM, LanzaGA, W ickline SA. Targeted contrastagents formag-netic reson-ance imaging and ultrasound. CurrOpin Biotechnol,2005,16(1):89-92.
7. Huang SL, Hamilton AJ, Nagaraj A, et al. Improving ultrasound reflectivity and stability of echogenic liposomal dispersionsfor use astargeted ultrasound contrast agents. JPharm Sci,2001,90(12):1917-1926.
8. Schumann PA, Christiansen JP, Quigley RM, et al. Targeted microbubble binding se-lectively to GPⅡb Ⅲa receptors of plateletthrombi.Invest Radiol,2002,37(11):587-593.
9.梁海东,王兴华.超声微泡造影影像学及治疗作用的研究进展.中华医学超声杂志,2004,11(1)：3.
10. Nakaya H, Shimizu T, Isobe K, et al. Microbubble-enhanced ultrasound exposure promotes uptake of methotrexate into synovialcells and enhanced antiinflammatory effects in the knees of rabbitswith antigen-induced arthritis. Arthritis Rheum,2005, 52(8):2559-2566
11. Lanza GM, Wallace KD, ScottMJ, et al. Anovel site-targeted ultrasonic contrast agent with broad biomedical application. Circulation,1996,94(12):3334-3340.
12. HughesMS, Marsh JN, Hall CS, et al. Acoustic characterization in whole blood and plasma of site-targeted nanoparticle ultrasound contrast agent for molecular imaging. Acoust Soc Am,2005,117(12):964-972.
13. UngerEC, Matsunaga TO, McCreery T, et al. Therapeutic applica-tions of micro-bubbles. EurJRadiol,2002,42 (1):160-168.
14. Yamada S, Komuro K, Mikami T, et al. Novel quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion by harmonic power Doppler imaging during myocardial contrast echo-cardiography. Heart,2005,91(2):183-188.
15. Schwenger V, Korosoglou G, Hinkel UP, et al. Real-time contrast enhanced sono-graphy of renal transplant recipients predicts chronical-lograft nephropathy. AmJ Transplant,2006,6(3):609-615.
16. Lanza GM, Abendschein DR, Hall CS, et al. In vivo molecular imaging of stretch-induced tissue factor in carotid arteries with ligand-targeted nanoparticles. AmSoc Echocardiogr,2000,13(6):608-614.
17. Klibanov AL. Microbubble contrast agents:targeted ultrasoundimaging and ultra-sound-assisted drug-delivery applications. InvestRadiol,2006,41(3):354-362.
18. Miao CH, Brayman AA, Loeb KR, et al. Ultrasound enhances gene delivery of human factor IX plasmid. Hum Gene Ther,2005,16(7):893-905.
19. Chen S, Shohet RV, Bekeredjian R, et al. Optimization of ultrasound parameters for cardiac gene delivery of adenoviral or plasmid deoxyribo nucleicacid by ultrasound-targeted microbubble destruction. JAmColl Cardiol,2003,42(2):301-308.
20.程文,张青萍,贡雪灏,等.超声引导下瘤体内注入超声造影剂和p53基因治疗大鼠肝癌的初步研究.中华超声影像学杂志,2004,13(7)：543-546.
21. McDannold N, Vykhodtseva N, Hynynen K. Targeted disruption of the blood-brain barrier with focused ultrasound:association withcavitation activity. Phys Med Biol, 2006,51(4):793-807.
22. Seidel G, Claassen L, Meyer K, et al. Evaluation of blood flow in the cerebral micro-circulation:analysis of the refill kinetics during ultrasound contrast agent infusion. Ultrasound Med Biol,2001,27(8):1059-1064.
23. Darge K, Moeller RT, Trusen A, et al. Diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux with low-dose contrast enhanced harmonic ultrasound imaging. Pediatr Radiol,2005,35(1): 73-78.
24.李奇林.超声微泡造影剂的临床应用及研究进展.Foreign Medical Sciences Clinical Radiological Fascicle,2006, Nov.29(6):419-421
1.周永昌,郭万学,主编.超声医学[M].第5版.北京：科学技术文献出版社,2006.1005.
2. Kessler N, Cyteval C, Gallix B, et al. Appendicitis:evaluation of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of US, Doppler US, and laboratory findings. Radiology,2004; 230:472-478. (PMID:14688403)
3.王金锐,曹海根.实用腹部超声诊断学[M].北京：人民卫生出版社,2006：414-417.
4. Leslie M. Scoutt,, Steven R. Sawyers, Jamal Bokhari, et al. Ultrasound Evaluation of the Acute Abdomen. Ultrasound Clin 2007; 2:493-523 (This article is not cited in Pubmed)(http://www. mdconsult. com/das/article/body/177812682-2/jorg=journal & source=&sp= 20204737&sid=0/N/621541/1.html?issn=1556-858X)
5.李睿,陈滔.彩超在小儿外科急腹症诊断中的应用价值[J].西部医学,2008；20(6)：1269-1270.
6.夏焙,吴瑛.小儿超声诊断学[M].北京：人民卫生出版社,2001：318.
7. Kaiser S, Jorulf H, Soderman E, et al. Impact of radiologic imaging on the surgical deci-sion making process in suspected appendicitis in children. Acad Radiol,2004; 11(9):971-979. (PMID:15350578)
8.桂新,马桂英,杨江娟,等.肠套叠彩色超声诊断的临床意义[J].实用儿科临床杂志,2004,19(7)：603.
9. 张莉.成人小肠套叠的超声诊断[J].中国超声医学杂志,1999,15(4)：692-694.
10. Orzech N, Navarro O, Langer J. Is ultrasonography a good screening test for intestinal malrotation?J Pediatr Surg,2006; 41(5):1005-1009. (PMID:16677901)
11. Patino MO, Munden MM. Utility of sonographic whirlpool sign in diagnosing midgut volvulus in patients with atypical clinical presentations. J Ultrasound Med,2004; 23(3):397-401. (PMID:15055787)
12.丁玫.肠梗阻超声影像分析[J].医药论坛杂志,2008,29(12)：97-98.
13.张健,段志泉,罗英伟,等.急性肠系膜上静脉血栓形成的诊治分析.中华普通外科杂志,2005,20(1)：21-23.
14.段志泉,孙成林.肠系膜静脉血栓形成的诊断与治疗.中华医学杂志,2004,84(18)：1572-1574
15. Maconi G, Radice E, Greco A, et al. Bowel ultrasound in Crohn's disease. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2006; 20:93-112. (PMID:16473803)
16. Sung T, Callahan M, Taylor GA. Clinical and imaging mimickers of acute appendicitis in the pediatric population. AJR Am J Roentgenol,2006; 186(1):167-174. (PMID:16357381)
17. Rathaus V, Shapiro M, Grunebaum M, et al. Enlarged mesenteric lymph nodes in asymp-tomatic children:the value of the finding in various imaging modalities. Br J Radiol,2005; 78(925):30-33. (PMID:15673526)
18.秦达,张武,译.急腹症的超声检查：胃肠部分[J/CD].中华医学超声杂志：电子版,2008,5(1)：165-184.
19.刘明瑜,何小梅,樊文峰,等.超声对阑尾炎病变的诊断价值[J].中国超声医学杂志,2003,19(7)：536.
20. Sorantin E, Lindbichler F. Management of Intussusception. Eur Radiol,2004; (Suppl 4):L 146-154. (PMID:14752570)
21. Lee JH, Choi SH, Jeong YK, et al. Intermittent sonographic guidance in air enema for re-duction of childhood intussusception. J Ultrasound Med,2006; 25(9):1125-1130. (PMID:16929012)
22. Cerro P, Magrini P, Porcari P, et al. Sonographic diagnosis of intussusceptions in adults[J]. Abdom Imaging,2000,25(1):45-47. (PMID:10652920)