Antje Arnold1,2, Yuguo Li1,3, Guanshu Liu1,3, Peter C.M. van Zijl1,3, Jeff W.M. Bulte1,2, Piotr Walczak1,2, and Kannie WY Chan1,3
1Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States, 2Cellular Imaging Section and Vascular Biology Program, Institute for Cell Engineering, Baltimore, MD, United States, 3FM Kirby Research Center, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, United States
Synopsis
Cell
therapy is showing promise in treating neurological disorders, but cell
survival after transplantation is usually low, which is a major limiting factor
for achieving therapeutic efficacy. One of the major hurdles in translating
cell therapies to patients is the lack of non-invasive approaches to monitor
the cells and their microenvironment after transplantation. We developed an
injectable alginate hydrogel that supports cell survival and allows monitoring of
cell status using liposomes as the nanosensors after transplantation into the
brain. Hydrogel embedded cells survived better as compared to the cells without
the hydrogel, and cells transplanted using the nanosensor-labeled hydrogel could
be imaged using CEST-MRI.Purpose
The
purpose of this study was to develop an injectable hydrogel labeled with MRI
nanosensor to facilitate the cell delivery to the brain with MRI monitoring of
cell status. Previously, we showed that nanosensor-labeled hydrogels can be
used to immunoprotect transplanted cells and sense cell viability [1-3]. Here, we
customized the hydrogel focusing on reducing its stiffness, thus better
supporting migration of glial restricted progenitor (GRP) cells following
intracerebral delivery. Furthermore, we utilized CEST contrast at 5 ppm to
improve specificity of the nanosensor.
Methods
CEST-MRI protocol for phantoms: Alginate hydrogels
labeled with liposomal nanosensors were imaged on a vertical bore 11.7T Bruker
Avance system at 37°C. A modified rapid acquisition with relaxation enhancement
(RARE) sequence including a saturation pulse was used to acquire saturation
images at different irradiation frequency, which were used to generate the
z-spectrum in each voxel. A slice thickness of 1 mm was used, and the typical
imaging parameters were: TE=4.3ms, RARE factor=16, matrix size=128x64, NA=2,
and the field of view was 13x13x1mm. Two sets of saturation images were
acquired. First, we acquired frequency images to map the spatial distribution
of B0. Water Saturation Shift Referencing (WASSR) mapping was
employed [4, 5], for which we used a
saturation pulse length of 500ms, saturation field strength (B1) of
0.5µT, and saturation frequency increment of 0.1ppm. Secondly, we acquired CEST
images. The acquisition time per frequency point was 12s for frequency maps
(TR=1.5s) and 48s for CEST images (TR=6s). For CEST data, we used a saturation
pulse length of 4s, B1 values of 1.6,2.4, 3.6,4.7 and 5.9µT, and a
frequency increment of 0.2ppm. Nanosensor-labeled hydrogel preparation:
Alginate (Novamatrix) was dissolved in buffered saline, and then mixed with
liposomes [6] containing either
L-arginine (2ppm label) [1] or barbituric acid (5ppm
label) [7]. GRP cells
isolated from the spinal cord of E13.5 old PLP-GFP+/Luc+
mice were cultured in growth medium for 15-21days. CEST-MRI protocol in vivo: Rag2 mice (8w, 23–25g) were
positioned in a custom made holder equipped with a heating system, anesthetized
with isoflurane (1-1.5%) and MRI was performed on a horizontal bore 11.7T
BIOSPEC system with a 23mm volume coil. The acquisition parameters for in
vivo study: TR=5.0s, RARE factor=8, tsat=3s, B1=3.6 or 4.7μT, slice
thickness=1mm, acquisition matrix size=128×64, FOV=16×16mm, NA=2. WASSR offset
range =±2ppm (0.1ppm steps) and z-spectra offset range=±6ppm (0.2ppm steps).
All data were processed using custom-written Matlab scripts. In vivo bioluminescence (BL)
imaging: was performed for two groups of mice, one with (Gel, n=2) and one
without (Control, n=1) the presence of hydrogel. All mice were imaged on days
0,1,5,8 and 14 after transplantation and 25min after luciferin injection (150mg/kg
i.p.) using an IVIS 200 optical imaging system (Caliper Life Sciences) [1]. BL images were
processed using Xenogen Living Imaging software.
Results and discussion
We optimized
the stiffness and gelation time of alginate-based hydrogel, assuring there is
sufficient time for injection and to favor the survival of the GRP cells. As
shown in Fig.1, we imaged the cell viability of GRPs using conventional BL
imaging after transplantation into Rag2 mice, BL signal is higher in the
presence of hydrogel compared to the graft without hydrogel from day 5 onwards.
The BL signal in normalized radiance was 62% higher than that of the control in
two weeks (n=2), showing the hydrogel supports cell survival. Moreover, the
CEST-MRI contrast of the nanosensor-labeled hydrogel is at 5ppm, which is away
from the endogenous contrast of 1-4ppm in the brain, thus is favorable for
neural applications. The Rag2 mouse transplanted with cells embedded in hydrogel
labeled with nanosensors detectable at 5ppm showed strong contrast as compared
to the surrounding brain tissue (contrast of the hydrogel to the brain
(Gel:Brain=1.6, Fig. 2A)), while the hydrogel-labeled with nanosenors at 2ppm was
not so conspicuous (Gel:Brain=1.2, Fig. 2B). The lower contrast to background
ratio at 2ppm is probably due to the high endogenous CEST background and direct
saturation and conventional magnetization transfer effects in the brain. We are
now studying the contrast change over time after transplantation and examine if
we can use this approach to longitudinally monitor engrafted cells.
Conclusions
In this
study, we have developed an injectable alginate-based hydrogel to facilitate
the delivery and monitoring of cells grafted into the brain. This hydrogel formulation
can be robustly labeled with liposomes as the nanosensors for imaging
transplanted cells using CEST-MRI. The contrast is at 5ppm, which is removed
from the endogenous CEST contrast at 1-4ppm, thus facilitating more specific
detection. This favors application to cell replacement therapies into the brain.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by NIH R21EB018934, R01NS076573References
[1] Chan KW, et al. Nature
materials. 2013;12:268-75. [2] Liang Y, et al. Biomaterials. 2013;34:5521-9. [3]
Liang Y, et al. Biomaterials. 2015;42:144-50. [4] Liu G, et al. NMR Biomed.
2013;26:810-28. [5] Kim M, et al. Magn Reson Med. 2009;61:1441-50. [6] Chan KW,
et al. WIREs Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology. 2014;6:111-24. [7] Chan KW, et
al. J Control. Release 2014;180:51-9.