Characterization of colon cancer cell lines.

<p>(A) Western blot analysis shows pro-IGF-1R and IGF-1Rα expression at 200 and 130 kDa in colon cancer cell lines, respectively (HT-29 and HCT 116). (B) Labeling of live HCT 116 and HT-29 cells with 550 nm fluorophore-conjugated antibodies shows multiple fluorescent foci on the surface. Representative fluorescence images merged with corresponding DIC (differential interference contrast) images (x60 water immersion objective with the FV1000, using the 559 nm laser).</p

Imaging of MUC1 targeting of pancreatic tumors growing on skin flaps.

<p>Representative images were obtained under white light, and 473 nm and 559 nm lasers on the OV100, and merged. GFP signal from the individual cancer cells and red fluorescent signal from the DyLight 550 fluorophore-conjugated anti-MUC1 antibody at the outside margin of the colony and space between the cancer cells were observed.</p

Imaging of IGF-1R targeting of liver metastasis.

<p>Anti-IGF-1R conjugated to PEGylated 650 nm dye selectively labeled the HCT 116-GFP metastatic tumors. Both in vivo (A) and ex vivo (B) imaging show that the 650 nm fluorophore-conjugated IGF-1R antibodies co-localized with HCT 116-GFP fluorescence and more accurately demarked the tumor compared to bright light imaging (white arrowheads). H & E staining of tissue sample (x200) expressing fluorescence confirms the presence of metastatic tumor in the mouse liver.</p

Imaging of IGF-1R targeting of orthotopically-transplanted HCT 116 colon tumors in vivo.

<p>Fluorescence from orthotopically transplanted colon tumors at the cecum was detected before and after abdominal laparotomy. Also, fluorescence from the resected tumor was detected. Weak fluorescence was also detected from the skin and, bladder and intestinal contents, but at much lower intensity than the tumor. White arrows indicate colon tumor.</p

Characterization of pancreatic cancer cell lines.

<p>(A) Western blot analysis shows MUC1 expression in pancreatic cancer cell lines (BxPC-3 and Panc-1). (B) Flow cytometric analysis shows the expression of MUC1 on the surface of BxPC-3 and Panc-1 cell lines. (C) Immunocytochemistry on live cells shows multiple fluorescent dots on the surface of Panc-1 cells. Representative fluorescence images merged with corresponding DIC (differential interference contrast) images (x60 water immersion objective on FV1000, using the 559 nm laser).</p

Imaging of MUC1 targeting of orthotopically-transplanted Panc-1 and BxPC-3 pancreatic tumor in vivo.

<p>Fluorescence signals from pancreatic tumors orthotopically transplanted at the tail of the pancreas were detected. Other than the tumor, fluorescence signal was detected from the skin and, bladder and intestinal contents but at lower intensity than the tumor. White arrows indicate pancreatic tumor.</p

Imaging of 650 nm fluorophore-conjugated IGF-1R antibody targeting of subcutaneous colon tumors in vivo.

<p>(A) The mouse that is imaged under both white light and fluorescence illumination. The intensity of fluorescence from the HCT 116 and HT-29 subcutaneous tumors is much greater than background. (B) Hematoxylin & eosin staining (x200, left). Fluorescence immunostaining for IGF-1R (x20 regular objective, IV-100 scanning laser microscope (Olympus) with a 633 nm laser, right) of frozen HCT 116 tumor samples shows fluorescence on the membrane of the cancer cells.</p

Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is not superior to early ERCP in acute biliary pancreatitis with biliary obstruction without cholangitis

<div><p>Acute pancreatitis is a common diagnosis worldwide, with gallstone disease being the most prevalent cause (50%). The American College of Gastroenterology recommends urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (within 24 h) for patients with biliary pancreatitis accompanied by cholangitis. Most international guidelines recommend that ERCP be performed within 72 h in patients with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis, but the optimal timing for endoscopy is controversial. We investigated the optimal timing for ERCP in patients with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis, and whether performing endoscopy within 24 h is superior to performing it after 24 h. We analyzed the clinical data of 505 patients with newly diagnosed acute pancreatitis, from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2014. We divided the patients into two groups according to the timing of ERCP: < 24 h (urgent) and 24–72 h (early).Among the 505 patients, 73 were diagnosed with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis. The mean age of the patients was 55 years (range: 26–90 years). Bile duct stones and biliary sludge were identified on endoscopy in 45 (61.6%) and 11 (15.0%) patients, respectively. The timing of ERCP within 72 h was not associated with ERCP-related complications (<i>P</i> = 0.113), and the total length of hospital stay was not different between urgent and early ERCP (5.9 vs. 5.7 days, <i>P =</i> 0.174). No significant differences were found in total length of hospitalization or procedural-related complications, in patients with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis, according to the timing of ERCP (< 24 h vs. 24–72 h).</p></div

Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is not superior to early ERCP in acute biliary pancreatitis with biliary obstruction without cholangitis

<div><p>Acute pancreatitis is a common diagnosis worldwide, with gallstone disease being the most prevalent cause (50%). The American College of Gastroenterology recommends urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (within 24 h) for patients with biliary pancreatitis accompanied by cholangitis. Most international guidelines recommend that ERCP be performed within 72 h in patients with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis, but the optimal timing for endoscopy is controversial. We investigated the optimal timing for ERCP in patients with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis, and whether performing endoscopy within 24 h is superior to performing it after 24 h. We analyzed the clinical data of 505 patients with newly diagnosed acute pancreatitis, from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2014. We divided the patients into two groups according to the timing of ERCP: < 24 h (urgent) and 24–72 h (early).Among the 505 patients, 73 were diagnosed with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis. The mean age of the patients was 55 years (range: 26–90 years). Bile duct stones and biliary sludge were identified on endoscopy in 45 (61.6%) and 11 (15.0%) patients, respectively. The timing of ERCP within 72 h was not associated with ERCP-related complications (<i>P</i> = 0.113), and the total length of hospital stay was not different between urgent and early ERCP (5.9 vs. 5.7 days, <i>P =</i> 0.174). No significant differences were found in total length of hospitalization or procedural-related complications, in patients with biliary pancreatitis and a bile duct obstruction without cholangitis, according to the timing of ERCP (< 24 h vs. 24–72 h).</p></div

Study population enrolled in the present study.

<p>Among 505 patients with acute pancreatitis, 207 patients had a diagnosis of acute biliary pancreatitis. According to the exclusion criteria, a total of 73 patients were enrolled in the present study.</p