Table 1.
Strengths and limitations of imaging approaches in animal models of cancer
| Imaging modality | Strengths | Limitations |
|---|---|---|
| X-ray | Gross alterations of bone | Poor soft-tissue contrast, low resolution |
| CT | Can achieve high resolution in areas of high contrast (lung, bone); contrast agents available | Radiation dose with high-resolution imaging; limited intrinsic soft-tissue contrast |
| SPECT-PET | Molecular imaging, high sensitivity, whole-body imaging | Poor spatial resolution; use of radioactive probes |
| MRI | High resolution, excellent tissue contrast; contrast agents available | Long imaging time, high instrument costs and space requirements, high technical expertise required |
| US | Anatomic and functional (e.g., vascular) imaging, contrast agents available | Moderate spatial resolution, variable tissue contrast, directed imaging |
| Bioluminescence imaging | High signal:noise, high-throughput, user-friendly, cellular and molecular imaging applications | No clinical application, requires genetically encoded reporters |
| Fluorescence imaging | Widely available reagents, nonradioactive probes, cellular and molecular imaging applications | High autofluorescence and tissue attenuation |
-
CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; PET, positron-emission tomography; SPECT, single-photon emission computed tomography; US, ultrasonography.
