Recently, the demand for hybrid PET/MRI imaging techniques has increased significantly, which has sparked the investigation into new ways to simultaneously track multiple molecular targets and improve the localization and expression of biochemical markers. Multimodal imaging probes have recently emerged as powerful tools for improving the detection sensitivity and accuracy-both important factors in disease diagnosis and treatment; however, only a limited number of bimodal probes have been investigated in preclinical models. Herein, we briefly describe the strengths and limitations of PET and MRI modalities and highlight the need for the development of multimodal molecularly-targeted agents. We have tried to thoroughly summarize data on bimodal probes available on PubMed. Emphasis was placed on their design, safety profiles, pharmacokinetics, and clearance properties. The challenges in PET/MR probe development using a number of illustrative examples are also discussed, along with future research directions for these novel conjugates.

Central European Institute of Technology Brno University of Technology Brno Czech Republic

Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging The Institute of Cancer Research London UK

Radiopharmacy and Preclinical PET Imaging Unit Maria Sklodowska Curie National Research Institute of Oncology Gliwice Poland

Silesian University of Technology Faculty of Chemistry Gliwice Poland

See more in PubMed

Leeflang MMG, Allerberger F. How to: evaluate a diagnostic test. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019;25(1):54–59. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2018.06.011 PubMed DOI

Chen Z-Y, Wang Y-X, Lin Y, et al. Advance of molecular imaging technology and targeted imaging agent in imaging and therapy. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:1–12. doi:10.1155/2014/819324 PubMed DOI PMC

Picano E. Sustainability of medical imaging. Br Med J. 2004;328(7439):578–580. doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7439.578 PubMed DOI PMC

Stucht D, Danishad KA, Schulze P, Godenschweger F, Zaitsev M, Speck O. Highest resolution in vivo human brain MRI using prospective motion correction. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):1–17. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133921 PubMed DOI PMC

Kramer-Marek G, Capala J. Can PET imaging facilitate optimization of cancer therapies? Curr Pharm Des. 2012;18(18):2657–2669. doi:10.2174/138161212800492813 PubMed DOI

Davidson CL, Heldebrant DJ, Bearden MD, Horner JA, Freeman CJ. The IUPAC Compendium of Chemical Terminology. Vol. 114. Gold V ed. Research Triangle Park, NC: International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC); 2019. doi:10.1351/goldbook DOI

Weishaupt D, Köchli VD, Marincek B. How Does MRI Work? Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2006. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-37845-7 DOI

Westbrook C, Talbot J. MRI in Practice. 5th ed. John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2018.

Dryzek J. Charakterystyki procesu anihilacji pozytonów w materii. 2000. doi:10.4103/0971-6203.25665 DOI

Wadsak W, Mitterhauser M. Basics and principles of radiopharmaceuticals for PET/CT. Eur J Radiol. 2010;73(3):461–469. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.12.022 PubMed DOI

Treglia G, Salsano M. PET imaging using radiolabelled antibodies: future direction in tumor diagnosis and correlate applications. Res Rep Nucl Med. 2013;9. doi:10.2147/rrnm.s35186 DOI

Yang CT, Ghosh KK, Padmanabhan P, et al. PET-MR and SPECT-MR multimodality probes: development and challenges. Theranostics. 2018;8(22):6210–6232. doi:10.7150/thno.26610 PubMed DOI PMC

Lamb J, Holland JP. Advanced methods for radiolabeling multimodality nanomedicines for SPECT/MRI and PET/MRI. J Nucl Med. 2018;59(3):382–389. doi:10.2967/jnumed.116.187419 PubMed DOI

Dammes N, Peer D. Monoclonal antibody-based molecular imaging strategies and theranostic opportunities. Theranostics. 2020;10(2):938–955. doi:10.7150/thno.37443 PubMed DOI PMC

Bulte JWM, Kraitchman DL. Iron oxide MR contrast agents for molecular and cellular imaging. NMR Biomed. 2004;17(7):484–499. doi:10.1002/nbm.924 PubMed DOI

Estelrich J, Sánchez-Martín MJ, Busquets MA. Nanoparticles in magnetic resonance imaging: from simple to dual contrast agents. Int J Nanomed. 2015;10:1727–1741. doi:10.2147/IJN.S76501 PubMed DOI PMC

Na HB, Song IC, Hyeon T. Inorganic nanoparticles for MRI contrast agents. Adv Mater. 2009;21(21):2133–2148. doi:10.1002/adma.200802366 DOI

Wood ML, Hardy PA. Proton relaxation enhancement. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1993;3(1):149–156. doi:10.1002/jmri.1880030127 PubMed DOI

Bloembergen N. Proton relaxation times in paramagnetic solutions. J Chem Phys. 1957;27(2):572–573. doi:10.1063/1.1743771 DOI

Strandberg E, Westlund PO. 1H NMRD profile and ESR lineshape calculation for an isotropic electron spin system with S = 7/2. A generalized modified solomon-bloembergen-morgan theory for nonextreme-narrowing conditions. J Magn Reson. 1996;122(2):179–191. doi:10.1006/jmra.1996.0193 DOI

Lauffer RB. Paramagnetic metal complexes as water proton relaxation agents for NMR imaging: theory and design. Chem Rev. 1987;87(5):901–927. doi:10.1021/cr00081a003 DOI

Terencio T, Roithová J, Brandès S, Rousselin Y, Penouilh MJ, Meyer M. A comparative IRMPD and DFT study of Fe3+ and UO22+ complexation with N-methylacetohydroxamic acid. Inorg Chem. 2018;57(3):1125–1135. doi:10.1021/acs.inorgchem.7b02567 PubMed DOI

Aryal S, Key J, Stigliano C, Landis MD, Lee DY, Decuzzi P. Positron emitting magnetic nanoconstructs for PET/MR imaging. Small. 2014;10(13):2688–2696. doi:10.1002/smll.201303933 PubMed DOI

Verwilst P, Park S, Yoon B, Kim JS. Recent advances in Gd-chelate based bimodal optical/MRI contrast agents. Chem Soc Rev. 2015;44(7):1791–1806. doi:10.1039/c4cs00336e PubMed DOI

Caravan P, Ellison JJ, McMurry TJ, Lauffer RB. Gadolinium(III) chelates as MRI contrast agents: structure, dynamics, and applications. Chem Rev. 1999;99(9):2293–2352. doi:10.1021/cr980440x PubMed DOI

Rinck PA, Muller RN. Field strength and dose dependence of contrast enhancement by gadolinium-based MR contrast agents. Eur Radiol. 1999;9(5):998–1004. doi:10.1007/s003300050781 PubMed DOI

Kellar KE, Fujii DK, Gunther WHH, Briley-Sæbø K, Spiller M, Koenig SH. ‘NC100150ʹ, a preparation of iron oxide nanoparticles ideal for positive-contrast MR angiography. Magma Magn Reson Mater Phys Biol Med. 1999;8(3):207–213. doi:10.1007/BF02594600 PubMed DOI

Taboada E, Rodríguez E, Roig A, Oró J, Roch A, Muller RN. Relaxometric and magnetic characterization of ultrasmall iron oxide nanoparticles with high magnetization. Evaluation as potential T1 magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents for molecular imaging. Langmuir. 2007;23(8):4583–4588. doi:10.1021/la063415s PubMed DOI

Das S, Parga K, Chakraborty I, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging contrast enhancement in vitro and in vivo by octanuclear iron-oxo cluster-based agents. J Inorg Biochem. 2018;186:176–186. doi:10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2018.06.005 PubMed DOI PMC

Marangon I, Ménard-Moyon C, Kolosnjaj-Tabi J, et al. Covalent functionalization of multi-walled carbon nanotubes with a gadolinium chelate for efficient T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Adv Funct Mater. 2014;24(45):7173–7186. doi:10.1002/adfm.201402234 DOI

Ananta JS, Matson ML, Tang AM, et al. Single-walled carbon nanotube materials as T2-weighted MRI contrast agents. J Phys Chem C. 2009;113(45):19369–19372. doi:10.1021/jp907891n DOI

Engelking LR. Chapter 4 – protein structure. Textb Vet Physiol Chem. 2015;18–25. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-391909-0.50004-9 DOI

Turgeon ML. Clinical Hematology: Theory and Procedures. 4th ed. Kraków: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004.

Kim S, Chae MK, Yim MS, et al. Hybrid PET/MR imaging of tumors using an oleanolic acid-conjugated nanoparticle. Biomaterials. 2013;34(33):8114–8121. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.07.078 PubMed DOI

Chen F, Ellison PA, Lewis CM, et al. Chelator-free synthesis of a dual-modality PET/MRI agent. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2013;23(1):1–7. doi:10.1002/anie.201306306.Chelator-Free PubMed DOI PMC

Lee HY, Li Z, Chen K, et al. PET/MRI dual-modality tumor imaging using arginine-glycine-aspartic (RGD)-conjugated radiolabeled iron oxide nanoparticles. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(8):1371–1379. doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.051243 PubMed DOI

Choi JS, Park JC, Nah H, et al. A hybrid nanoparticle probe for dual-modality positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Angew Chemie. 2008;47(33):6259–6262. doi:10.1002/anie.200801369 PubMed DOI

Shi X, Shen L. Integrin α v β 3 receptor targeting PET/MRI dual-modal imaging probe based on the 64 Cu labeled manganese ferrite nanoparticles. J Inorg Biochem. 2018;186:257–263. doi:10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2018.06.004 PubMed DOI

Tu C, Ng TSC, Jacobs RE, Louie AY. Multimodality PET/MRI agents targeted to activated macrophages topical issue on metal-based MRI contrast agents. Guest editor: Valerie C. Pierre. J Biol Inorg Chem. 2014;19(2):247–258. doi:10.1007/s00775-013-1054-9 PubMed DOI PMC

Frullano L, Catana C, Benner T, Sherry AD, Caravan P. Bimodal MR-PET agent for quantitative pH imaging. Angew Chemie. 2010;49(13):2382–2384. doi:10.1002/anie.201000075 PubMed DOI PMC

Uppal R, Catana C, Ay I, Benner T, Sorensen AG, Caravan P. Bimodal thrombus imaging: simultaneous PET/MR imaging with a fibrin-targeted dual PET/MR probe—feasibility study in rat model. Radiology. 2011;258(3):812–820. doi:10.1148/radiol.10100881 PubMed DOI PMC

Vologdin N, Rolla GA, Botta M, Tei L. Orthogonal synthesis of a heterodimeric ligand for the development of the GdIII-GaIII ditopic complex as a potential pH-sensitive MRI/PET probe. Org Biomol Chem. 2013;11(10):1683–1690. doi:10.1039/c2ob27200h PubMed DOI

Devreux M, Henoumont C, Dioury F, et al. Bimodal probe for magnetic resonance imaging and photoacoustic imaging based on a PCTA-derived gadolinium(III) complex and ZW800-1. Eur J Inorg Chem. 2019;2019(29):3354–3365. doi:10.1002/ejic.201900387 DOI

Wang Y-XJ. Superparamagnetic iron oxide based MRI contrast agents: current status of clinical application. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2011;1(1):35–40. doi:10.3978/j.issn.2223-4292.2011.08.03 PubMed DOI PMC

Thorek DLJ, Ulmert D, Diop N-FM, et al. Non-invasive mapping of deep-tissue lymph nodes in live animals using a multimodal PET/MRI nanoparticle. Nat Commun. 2014;5(1):3097. doi:10.1038/ncomms4097 PubMed DOI PMC

Knobloch G, Colgan T, Wiens CN, et al. Relaxivity of ferumoxytol at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. Invest Radiol. 2018;53(5):257–263. doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000434 PubMed DOI PMC

Jarrett BR, Gustafsson B, Kukis DL, Louie AY. Synthesis of 64 Cu-labeled magnetic nanoparticles for multimodal imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2008;19(7):1496–1504. doi:10.1021/bc800108v.Synthesis PubMed DOI PMC

Glaus C, Rossin R, Welch MJ, Bao G. In vivo evaluation of 64Cu-labeled magnetic nanoparticles as a dual-modality PET/MR imaging agent. Bioconjug Chem. 2010;21(4):715–722. doi:10.1021/bc900511j PubMed DOI PMC

Yang X, Hong H, Grailer JJ, et al. cRGD-functionalized, DOX-conjugated, and 64 Cu-labeled superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for targeted anticancer drug delivery and PET/MR imaging. Biomaterials. 2011;32(17):4151. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.02.006.cRGD-functionalized PubMed DOI PMC

Locatelli E, Gil L, Israel LL, et al. Biocompatible nanocomposite for PET/MRI hybrid imaging. Int J Nanomedicine. 2012;7:6021–6033. doi:10.2147/IJN.S38107 PubMed DOI PMC

Wong RM, Gilbert DA, Liu K, Louie AY. Rapid size-controlled synthesis of oxide nanoparticles. ACS Nano. 2012;6(4):3461–3467. doi:10.1021/nn300494k PubMed DOI

Chakravarty R, Valdovinos HF, Chen F, et al. Intrinsically germanium-69 labeled iron oxide nanoparticle: synthesis and in vivo dual-modality PET/MR imaging. Physiol Behav. 2014;176(1):100–106. doi:10.1002/adma.201401372. PubMed DOI PMC

Cui X, Belo S, Krüger D, et al. Aluminium hydroxide stabilised MnFe2O4 and Fe3O4 nanoparticles as dual-modality contrasts agent for MRI and PET imaging. Biomaterials. 2014;35(22):5840–5846. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.04.004 PubMed DOI PMC

Truillet C, Bouziotis P, Tsoukalas C, et al. Ultrasmall particles for Gd-MRI and 68Ga-PET dual imaging. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2015;10(4):309–319. doi:10.1002/cmmi.1633 PubMed DOI

Yang BY, Moon SH, Seelam SR, et al. Development of a multimodal imaging probe by encapsulating iron oxide nanoparticles with functionalized amphiphiles for lymph node imaging. Nanomedicine. 2015;10(12):1899–1910. doi:10.2217/nnm.15.41 PubMed DOI

Moon SH, Yang BY, Kim YJ, et al. Development of a complementary PET/MR dual-modal imaging probe for targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA). Nanomed Nanotechnol Biol Med. 2016;12(4):871–879. doi:10.1016/j.nano.2015.12.368 PubMed DOI

Pellico J, Ruiz-Cabello J, Saiz-Alía M, et al. Fast synthesis and bioconjugation of 68Ga core-doped extremely small iron oxide nanoparticles for PET/MR imaging. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2016;11(3):203–210. doi:10.1002/cmmi.1681 PubMed DOI

Nguyen Pham TH, Lengkeek NA, Greguric I, et al. Tunable and noncytotoxic PET/SPECT-MRI multimodality imaging probes using colloidally stable ligand-free superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles. Int J Nanomed. 2017;12:899–909. doi:10.2147/IJN.S127171 PubMed DOI PMC

Zhu J, Li H, Xiong Z, et al. Polyethyleneimine-coated manganese oxide nanoparticles for targeted tumor PET/MR imaging. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(41):34954–34964. doi:10.1021/acsami.8b12355 PubMed DOI PMC

Thakare V, Tran VL, Natuzzi M, et al. Functionalization of theranostic AGuIX® nanoparticles for PET/MRI/optical imaging. RSC Adv. 2019;9(43):24811–24815. doi:10.1039/c9ra00365g PubMed DOI PMC

Gholami YH, Yuan H, Wilks MQ, et al. A radio-nano-platform for T1/T2 dual-mode PET-MR imaging. Int J Nanomed. 2020;15:1253–1266. doi:10.2147/IJN.S241971 PubMed DOI PMC

Xu F, Li X, Chen H, et al. Synthesis of heteronanostructures for multimodality molecular imaging-guided photothermal therapy. J Mater Chem B. 2020;8(44):10136–10145. doi:10.1039/d0tb02136a PubMed DOI

Shaw TB, Jeffree RL, Thomas P, et al. Diagnostic performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of glioma. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2019;63(5):650–656. doi:10.1111/1754-9485.12929 PubMed DOI

Groult H, Ruiz-Cabello J, Pellico J, et al. Parallel multifunctionalization of nanoparticles: a one-step modular approach for in vivo imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2015;26(1):153–160. doi:10.1021/bc500536y PubMed DOI

Yang M, Fan Q, Zhang R, et al. Dragon fruit-like biocage as an iron trapping nanoplatform for high efficiency targeted cancer multimodality imaging. Biomaterials. 2015;69:30–37. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.08.001 PubMed DOI PMC

Thomas G, Boudon J, Maurizi L, et al. Innovative magnetic nanoparticles for PET/MRI bimodal imaging. ACS Omega. 2019;4(2):2637–2648. doi:10.1021/acsomega.8b03283 PubMed DOI PMC

Boros E, Bowen AM, Josephson L, Vasdev N, Holland JP. Chelate-free metal ion binding and heat-induced radiolabeling of iron oxide nanoparticles. Chem Sci. 2015;6(1):225–236. doi:10.1039/c4sc02778g PubMed DOI PMC

Torres Martin de Rosales R, Tavaré R, Paul RL, et al. Synthesis of 64 Cu II -Bis(dithiocarbamatebisphosphonate) and its conjugation with superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles: in vivo evaluation as dual-modality PET-MRI agent. Angew Chemie. 2011;50(24):5509–5513. doi:10.1002/anie.201007894 PubMed DOI PMC

Abou DS, Thorek DLJ, Ramos NN, et al. 89Zr-labeled paramagnetic octreotide-liposomes for PET-MR imaging of cancer. Pharm Res. 2013;30(3):878–888. doi:10.1007/s11095-012-0929-8 PubMed DOI PMC

Desbois N, Michelin C, Chang Y, et al. Synthetic strategy for preparation of a folate corrole DOTA heterobimetallic Cu-Gd complex as a potential bimodal contrast agent in medical imaging. Tetrahedron Lett. 2015;56(51):7128–7131. doi:10.1016/j.tetlet.2015.11.032 DOI

Notni J, Hermann P, Dregely I, Wester HJ. Convenient synthesis of 68Ga-labeled gadolinium(III) complexes: towards bimodal responsive probes for functional imaging with PET/MRI. Chem a Eur J. 2013;19(38):12602–12606. doi:10.1002/chem.201302751 PubMed DOI

Sharma R, Xu Y, Kim SW, et al. Carbon-11 radiolabeling of iron-oxide nanoparticles for dual-modality PET/MR imaging. Nanoscale. 2013;5(16):7476–7483. doi:10.1039/c3nr02519e PubMed DOI

Naqvi S, Samim M, Abdin MZ, et al. Concentration-dependent toxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles mediated by increased oxidative stress. Int J Nanomed. 2010;5(1):983–989. doi:10.2147/IJN.S13244 PubMed DOI PMC

Naghavi N, Ghoddusi J, Sadeghnia HR, Asadpour E, Asgary S. Genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of mineral trioxide aggregate and calcium enriched mixture cements on L929 mouse fibroblast cells. Dent Mater J. 2014;33(1):64–69. doi:10.4012/dmj.2013-123 PubMed DOI

Abakumov MA, Semkina AS, Skorikov AS, et al. Toxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles: size and coating effects. J Biochem Mol Toxicol. 2018;32(12):1–6. doi:10.1002/jbt.22225 PubMed DOI

Wang Y, Alkasab TK, Narin O, et al. Incidence of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis after adoption of restrictive gadolinium-based contrast agent guidelines. Radiology. 2011;260(1):105–111. doi:10.1148/radiol.11102340 PubMed DOI

Kanda T, Ishii K, Kawaguchi H, Kitajima K, Takenaka D. High signal intensity in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: relationship with increasing cumulative dose of a gadoliniumbased contrast material. Radiology. 2014;270(3):834–841. doi:10.1148/radiol.13131669 PubMed DOI

Rogosnitzky M, Branch S. Gadolinium-based contrast agent toxicity: a review of known and proposed mechanisms. BioMetals. 2016;29(3):365–376. doi:10.1007/s10534-016-9931-7 PubMed DOI PMC

Harvey HB, Gowda V, Cheng G. Gadolinium deposition disease: a new risk management threat. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17(4):546–550. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2019.11.009 PubMed DOI

Radbruch A, Haase R, Kieslich PJ, et al. No signal intensity increase in the dentate nucleus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images after more than 20 serial injections of macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agents. Radiology. 2017;282(3):699–707. doi:10.1148/radiol.2016162241 PubMed DOI

Banerjee SR, Pomper MG. Clinical applications of Gallium-68. Appl Radiat Isot. 2013;76:2–13. doi:10.1016/j.apradiso.2013.01.039 PubMed DOI PMC

Baum R, Rösch F. 1 st World Congress on Ga-68 and Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRNT), June 23–26, 2011, Zentralklinik Bad Berka, Germany. World J Nucl Med. 2011;10(1):5. doi:10.4103/1450-1147.82105 PubMed DOI PMC

Fani M, André JP, Maecke HR. 68Ga-PET: a powerful generator-based alternative to cyclotron-based PET radiopharmaceuticals. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2008;3(2):53–63. doi:10.1002/cmmi.232 PubMed DOI

Roesch F, Riss P. The renaissance of the 68Ge/68Ga radionuclide generator initiates new developments in 68Ga radiopharmaceutical chemistry. Curr Top Med Chem. 2012;10(16):1633–1668. doi:10.2174/156802610793176738 PubMed DOI

Wadas TJ, Wong EH, Weisman GR, Anderson CJ. Coordinating radiometals of copper, gallium, indium, yttrium, and zirconium for PET and SPECT imaging of disease. Chem Rev. 2010;110(5):2858–2902. doi:10.1021/cr900325h PubMed DOI PMC

Rösch F, Baum RP. Generator-based PET radiopharmaceuticals for molecular imaging of tumours: on the way to THERANOSTICS. Dalt Trans. 2011;40(23):6104. doi:10.1039/c0dt01504k PubMed DOI

Szydlo M, Pogoda D, Kowalski T, Pociegiel M, Jadwinski M, Amico AD. Synthesis and quality control of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT tracer used in prostate cancer imaging and comparison with 18F-fluorocholine as a reference point. J Pharm Sci Emerg Drugs. 2018;06(01). doi:10.4172/2380-9477.1000126 DOI

Pauwels E, Cleeren F, Bormans G, Deroose CM. Somatostatin receptor PET ligands - The next generation for clinical practice. Am J Nucl Mol Imaging. 2018;8(5):311–331. PubMed PMC

Schuhmacher J, Zhang H, Doll J, et al. GRP receptor-targeted PET of a rat pancreas carcinoma xenograft in nude mice with a 68Ga-labeled bombesin (6–14) analog. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(4):691–699. PubMed

Froidevaux S, Calame-christe M, Schuhmacher J, et al. A gallium-labeled DOTA-α -melanocyte– stimulating hormone analog for PET imaging of melanoma metastases. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(1):116–123. PubMed

Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(3):480–508. doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.047787 PubMed DOI

Timmers HJ, Chen CC, Carrasquillo JA, et al. Comparison of 18F-fluoro-L-DOPA, 18F-fluoro- deoxyglucose, and18F-fluorodopamine PET and 123I-MIBG scintigraphy in the localization of pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94(12):4757–4767. doi:10.1210/jc.2009-1248 PubMed DOI PMC

Dias GM, Ramogida CF, Rousseau J, et al. 89Zr for antibody labeling and in vivo studies – a comparison between liquid and solid target production. Nucl Med Biol. 2018;58:1–7. doi:10.1016/j.nucmedbio.2017.11.005 PubMed DOI

Farooq M, Chupp T, Grange J, et al. Absolute magnetometry with He 3. Phys Rev Lett. 2020;124(22):223001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.223001 PubMed DOI

Chen D, Zhou Y, Yang D, et al. Positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging of glioblastoma using a functionalized gadofullerene nanoparticle. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2019;11(24):21343–21352. doi:10.1021/acsami.9b03542 PubMed DOI

Bourquin J, Milosevic A, Hauser D, et al. Biodistribution, clearance, and long-term fate of clinically relevant nanomaterials. Adv Mater. 2018;30(19):1704307. doi:10.1002/adma.201704307 PubMed DOI

Jarrett BR, Correa C, Ma KL, Louie AY. In vivo mapping of vascular inflammation using multimodal imaging. PLoS One. 2010;5(10):2–9. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013254 PubMed DOI PMC

Uppal R, Ciesienski KL, Chonde DB, Loving GS, Caravan P. Discrete bimodal probes for thrombus imaging. J Am Chem Soc. 2012;134(26):10799–10802. doi:10.1021/ja3045635 PubMed DOI PMC

Pierre VC, Allen MJ, Caravan P. Contrast agents for MRI: 30+ years and where are we going? Topical issue on metal-based MRI contrast agents. Guest editor: Valérie C. Pierre. J Biol Inorg Chem. 2014;19(2):127–131. doi:10.1007/s00775-013-1074-5 PubMed DOI PMC

Morrow JR, Tóth É. Next-generation magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. Inorg Chem. 2017;56(11):6029–6034. doi:10.1021/acs.inorgchem.7b01277 PubMed DOI

Duimstra JA, Femia FJ, Meade TJ. A gadolinium chelate for detection of β-glucuronidase: a self-immolative approach. J Am Chem Soc. 2005;127(37):12847–12855. doi:10.1021/ja042162r PubMed DOI

Hingorani DV, Bernstein AS, Pagel MD. A review of responsive MRI contrast agents: 2005–2014. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2015;10(4):245–265. doi:10.1002/cmmi.1629 PubMed DOI PMC

Kuźnik N, Wyskocka M. Iron(III) contrast agent candidates for MRI: a survey of the structure-effect relationship in the last 15 years of studies. Eur J Inorg Chem. 2016;2016(4):445–458. doi:10.1002/ejic.201501166 DOI

Wahsner J, Gale EM, Rodríguez-Rodríguez A, Caravan P. Chemistry of MRI contrast agents: current challenges and new frontiers. Chem Rev. 2019;119(2):957–1057. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00363 PubMed DOI PMC