Article

A permanent window for the murine lung enables high-resolution imaging of cancer metastasis

Received:
Accepted:
Published online:

Abstract

Stable, high-resolution intravital imaging of the lung has become possible through the utilization of vacuum-stabilized imaging windows. However, this technique is extremely invasive and limited to only hours in duration. Here we describe a minimally invasive, permanently implantable window for high-resolution intravital imaging of the murine lung that allows the mouse to survive surgery, recover from anesthesia, and breathe independently. Compared to vacuum-stabilized windows, this window produces the same high-quality images without vacuum-induced artifacts; it is also less invasive, which allows imaging of the same lung tissue over a period of weeks. We further adapt the technique of microcartography for reliable relocalization of the same cells longitudinally. Using commonly employed experimental, as well as more clinically relevant, spontaneous metastasis models, we visualize all stages of metastatic seeding, including: tumor cell arrival; extravasation; growth and progression to micrometastases; as well as tumor microenvironment of metastasis function, the hallmark of hematogenous dissemination of tumor cells.

  • Subscribe to Nature Methods for full access:

    $59

    Subscribe

Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.

References

  1. 1.

    et al. Stabilized imaging of immune surveillance in the mouse lung. Nat. Methods 8, 91–96 (2011).

  2. 2.

    et al. In vivo subcellular resolution optical imaging in the lung reveals early metastatic proliferation and motility. Intravital 4, 1–11 (2015).

  3. 3.

    Concise Medical Dictionary (Oxford University Press, 2010).

  4. 4.

    , , & Advanced motion compensation methods for intravital optical microscopy. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 20, 115–121 (2014).

  5. 5.

    et al. Two-photon imaging within the murine thorax without respiratory and cardiac motion artifact. Am. J. Pathol. 179, 75–82 (2011).

  6. 6.

    , , & In vivo microcartography and subcellular imaging of tumor angiogenesis: a novel platform for translational angiogenesis research. Microvasc. Res. 78, 51–56 (2009).

  7. 7.

    et al. Real-time imaging reveals local, transient vascular permeability, and tumor cell intravasation stimulated by TIE2hi macrophage-derived VEGFA. Cancer Discov. 5, 932–943 (2015).

  8. 8.

    et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induces breast cancer metastasis through a TMEM-mediated mechanism. Sci. Transl. Med. 9, eaan0026 (2017).

  9. 9.

    et al. Impaired healing of cutaneous wounds and colonic anastomoses in mice lacking thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor. J. Thromb. Haemost. 1, 2087–2096 (2003).

  10. 10.

    et al. Intravital microscopy through an abdominal imaging window reveals a pre-micrometastasis stage during liver metastasis. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 158ra145 (2012).

  11. 11.

    , , , & Involvement of Iba1 in membrane ruffling and phagocytosis of macrophages/microglia. J. Cell Sci. 113, 3073–3084 (2000).

  12. 12.

    , & Robbins Basic Pathology E-Book (Elsevier Health Sciences, 2017).

  13. 13.

    & Expressions for combining standard errors of two groups and for sequential standard error. Nature 198, 1020 (1963).

  14. 14.

    et al. Automated measurement of blood flow velocity and direction and hemoglobin oxygen saturation in the rat lung using intravital microscopy. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol. 304, L86–L91 (2013).

  15. 15.

    & Intravital microscopy of the lung: minimizing invasiveness. J. Biophotonics 9, 868–878 (2016).

  16. 16.

    et al. Setup and use of a two-laser multiphoton microscope for multichannel intravital fluorescence imaging. Nat. Protoc. 6, 1500–1520 (2011).

  17. 17.

    et al. In Current Protocols in Cell Biology (Eds. Bonifacino, J.S. et al.) Chapter 19 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2013).

  18. 18.

    & A method of high speed in vivo pulmonary microcinematography under physiologic conditions. Angiology 14, 160–164 (1963).

  19. 19.

    , & A new model for the study of pulmonary microcirculation: determination of pulmonary edema in rats. J. Surg. Res. 57, 385–393 (1994).

  20. 20.

    et al. Real-time imaging of single cancer-cell dynamics of lung metastasis. J. Cell. Biochem. 109, 58–64 (2010).

  21. 21.

    , & In vivo imaging and histochemistry are combined in the cryosection labelling and intravital microscopy technique. Nat. Commun. 4, 2366 (2013).

  22. 22.

    Classification of lung cancer. Semin. Roentgenol. 46, 178–186 (2011).

  23. 23.

    & Distribution of lung metastases in the axial plane. A combined radiological-pathological study. Radiol. Clin. (Basel) 46, 248–265 (1977).

  24. 24.

    & Endobronchial metastasis. Arch. Intern. Med. 135, 543–547 (1975).

  25. 25.

    , & Lung metastases. Eur. Radiol. 6, 596–606 (1996).

  26. 26.

    et al. Nitric-oxide-mediated zinc release contributes to hypoxic regulation of pulmonary vascular tone. Circ. Res. 102, 1575–1583 (2008).

  27. 27.

    et al. Various adhesion molecules impair microvascular leukocyte kinetics in ventilator-induced lung injury. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol. 290, L1059–L1068 (2006).

  28. 28.

    et al. Long-term high-resolution intravital microscopy in the lung with a vacuum stabilized imaging window. J. Vis. Exp. (2016).

  29. 29.

    The relationship of embolic homogeneity, number, size and viability to the incidence of experimental metastasis. Eur. J. Cancer 9, 223–227 (1973).

  30. 30.

    , & The significance of hematogenous tumor cell clumps in the metastatic process. Cancer Res. 36, 889–894 (1976).

  31. 31.

    et al. Circulating tumor cell clusters are oligoclonal precursors of breast cancer metastasis. Cell 158, 1110–1122 (2014).

  32. 32.

    et al. A protocol for the implantation of a permanent window for high-resolution imaging of the murine lung. Protocol Exchange (2017).

  33. 33.

    et al. Expression of Gal4-dependent transgenes in cells of the mononuclear phagocyte system labeled with enhanced cyan fluorescent protein using Csf1r-Gal4VP16/UAS-ECFP double-transgenic mice. J. Leukoc. Biol. 83, 430–433 (2008).

  34. 34.

    , & Conditional mouse lung cancer models using adenoviral or lentiviral delivery of Cre recombinase. Nat. Protoc. 4, 1064–1072 (2009).

  35. 35.

    & TIS21/BTG2 inhibits invadopodia formation by downregulating reactive oxygen species level in MDA-MB-231 cells. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 139, 1657–1665 (2013).

  36. 36.

    et al. Fas ligand-expressing lymphocytes enhance alveolar macrophage apoptosis in the resolution of acute pulmonary inflammation. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol. 307, L62–L70 (2014).

  37. 37.

    & Microscopic observation of the lung in vivo. Vasc. Dis. 2, 229–241 (1965).

  38. 38.

    , & NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675 (2012).

  39. 39.

    , , & Extended time-lapse intravital imaging of real-time multicellular dynamics in the tumor microenvironment. J. Vis. Exp. 112, e54042 (2016).

  40. 40.

    , & A pyramid approach to subpixel registration based on intensity. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 7, 27–41 (1998).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This technology was developed in the Gruss-Lipper Biophotonics Center and the Integrated Imaging Program at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. We acknowledge the support of these Centers in this work: Einstein's Integrated Imaging Program, Montefiore's Ruth L. Kirschstein T32 Training Grant of Surgeons for the Study of the Tumor Microenvironment (CA200561), NIH grants CA100324, CA216248, P30CA013330, and SIG #1S10OD019961-01. We thank M. Rottenkolber, R. Ibagon and A. Leggiadro of the Einstein Machine Shop for their skilled craftsmanship and design insight; and we thank C. Rodriguez-Tirado, B. Canella and U. Steidl's lab for help with evaluating blood counts.

Author information

Author notes

    • David Entenberg
    •  & Sonia Voiculescu

    These authors contributed equally to this work.

Affiliations

  1. Anatomy and Structural Biology, Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA.

    • David Entenberg
    • , Sonia Voiculescu
    • , Peng Guo
    • , Lucia Borriello
    • , Yarong Wang
    • , George S Karagiannis
    • , Joan Jones
    • , Maja Oktay
    •  & John Condeelis
  2. Gruss-Lipper Biophotonics Center, Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA.

    • David Entenberg
    • , Peng Guo
    • , Lucia Borriello
    • , Yarong Wang
    • , George S Karagiannis
    • , Joan Jones
    • , Maja Oktay
    •  & John Condeelis
  3. Integrated Imaging Program, Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx,New York, USA.

    • David Entenberg
    • , Yarong Wang
    • , George S Karagiannis
    • , Joan Jones
    • , Maja Oktay
    •  & John Condeelis
  4. Department of Surgery, Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA.

    • Sonia Voiculescu
    •  & Francis Baccay
  5. Analytical Imaging Facility, Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA.

    • Peng Guo
  6. Department of Pathology, Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA.

    • Joan Jones
    •  & Maja Oktay

Authors

  1. Search for David Entenberg in:

  2. Search for Sonia Voiculescu in:

  3. Search for Peng Guo in:

  4. Search for Lucia Borriello in:

  5. Search for Yarong Wang in:

  6. Search for George S Karagiannis in:

  7. Search for Joan Jones in:

  8. Search for Francis Baccay in:

  9. Search for Maja Oktay in:

  10. Search for John Condeelis in:

Contributions

D.E. and J.C. conceived of the technique; J.C. conceived of the biological goals for performance; D.E. designed the window and stage plate; D.E., S.V. and F.B. developed the surgical protocol; S.V., D.E., G.S.K., M.O. and J.C. designed the validation experiments; D.E. and S.V. performed the imaging; S.V. and L.B. performed the validation experiments; Y.W. bred the mice; P.G. performed 3D reconstructions; D.E., L.B. and P.G. performed the blood-flow measurements; S.V., D.E., G.S.K., M.O. and J.J. evaluated the validation results; D.E. and G.S.K. performed statistical analyses; M.O. and J.J. evaluated HE, IBA1 IHC and TMEM IHC in fixed lung sections; and D.E., S.V. and J.C. wrote the paper.

Competing interests

D.E., S.V., and J.C. have submitted a provisional patent application on the window (US provisional patent application no. 62/548,455).

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to David Entenberg or John Condeelis.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Text and Figures

    Supplementary Figures 1–8

  2. 2.

    Life Sciences Reporting Summary

    Life Sciences Reporting Summary

  3. 3.

    Supplementary Protocol

    A Protocol for the Implantation of a Permanent Window for High-Resolution Imaging of the Murine Lung

Zip files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Data 1

    Microcartography software setup file.

Excel files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Data 2

    Raw data for supplementary figures.

Videos

  1. 1.

    The WHRIL is well tolerated.

    WHRIL bearing mice are able to perform tasks of daily living (grooming, feeding, nesting, stretching, etc.) without impediment.

  2. 2.

    Time-lapse video of healthy lung vasculature shown in Supplemental Figure 1.

    Left: raw, unprocessed video showing single cell resolution imaging. Right: Same video with red (blood) channel averaged over time to improve definition of the vascular boundaries. Time between frames = 1 sec, FOV = 170 μm. Cyan = CFP labeled myeloid cells, Red = vasculature labeled by 155kD TMR-dextran.

  3. 3.

    Time lapse video of raw data shown in Figure 4A showing arrival of a tumor cell to join other cells trapped in the lung vasculature.

    Time between frames = 1.35 min. Time stamp = hh:mm:ss. FOV = 117x67 μm. Green = tumor cell, red = vasculature, cyan = macrophages.

  4. 4.

    Time lapse video of blood averaged data shown in Figure 4B showing extravasation of an experimentally metastasized tumor cell from inside the lung vasculature into an alveolus.

    Left: Maximum intensity projection of 3 slices (9 μm) within the lung vasculature. Right: 3D reconstruction of the entire data set (8 slices, 24 μm) FOV = 60 μm. Time between frames = 64 sec. Time stamp = hh:mm:ss.

  5. 5.

    Visualization of tumor cell extravasation in an experimental metastasis model.

    Raw unprocessed data corresponding to Figure 4B showing a single optical section of the lung vasculature. Time between frames = 64 sec. Green = GFP tumor cells, Cyan = CFP macrophages, Red = Ve-Cad labeled endothelia and 155kD TMR dextran. Time stamp = hh:mm:ss.

  6. 6.

    Video of data presented in Figure 5A showing one cell of a group of spontaneously metastasized tumor cells appearing to undergo division in the lung.

    Time between frames = 1.42 min. FOV = 75 μm. Green = GFP labeled tumor cells, Red = 155kD TMR dextran, Blue = SHG from collagen I fibers. Time stamp =mm:ss

  7. 7.

    Two frames from Supplemental Figure 3B showing co-registration of vasculature and an extravasated tumor cell.

  8. 8.

    Video of functional TMEM in the lung showing transient vasculature leakage (permeability).

    Yellow arrow indicates location of transient vascular leakage seen as red dextran appearing in the extravascular space.