RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Comparison of μCT, MRI and Optical Reflectance Imaging for Assessing the Growth of GFP/RFP-expressing Tumors JF Anticancer Research JO Anticancer Res FD International Institute of Anticancer Research SP 2907 OP 2913 VO 31 IS 9 A1 LOTFI ABOU-ELKACEM A1 FELIX GREMSE A1 STEFAN BARTH A1 ROBERT M. HOFFMAN A1 FABIAN KIESSLING A1 WILTRUD LEDERLE YR 2011 UL http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/31/9/2907.abstract AB Aim: To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), micro-computed tomography (μCT), optical reflectance imaging (ORI) and caliper measurements for subcutaneous tumor detection and size assessment. Materials and Methods: HCT 116-green- (GFP)-red-fluorescent protein (RFP) tumor volumes were measured in vivo by calipers and by ORI, MRI and μCT over 15 days and validated ex vivo. The method correlating best with the ex vivo tumor volumes was used as reference for longitudinal in vivo correlations. Results: MRI and ORI detected tumors at day 1 post-injection, μCT after 3 days. The in vivo MRI data correlated best with the ex vivo tumor volumes (r2=0.96), followed by μCT (r2=0.93). Thus, MRI was chosen as the reference. μCT-(r2=0.90), in vivo caliper data (r2=0.80) and fluorescence intensities (GFP:r2=0.71; RFP:r2=0.75) highly correlated with MRI-data, whereas fluorescent areas (GFP:r2=0.26; RFP:r2=0.30) poorly correlated. Conclusion: MRI sensitively detects tumors and precisely determines their size; μCT is an accurate alternative for larger tumors; ORI is as sensitive as MRI, but overestimates small tumor sizes; and fluorescence intensity correlates better with tumor volume than fluorescence area.