Fig. 9: In vivo NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric imaging for immunotherapy efficacy monitoring, individual stratification, and immunotherapy strategy optimization. | Nature Communications

Fig. 9: In vivo NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric imaging for immunotherapy efficacy monitoring, individual stratification, and immunotherapy strategy optimization.

From: NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric imaging of tumor-associated neutrophils for immunotherapy efficacy monitoring and strategy optimization

Fig. 9: In vivo NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric imaging for immunotherapy efficacy monitoring, individual stratification, and immunotherapy strategy optimization.The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

a Illustration of optimized immunotherapy and imaging schedule (n = 15 mice for each group, respectively). b NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric imaging of non-responder and responder group on day 14. c, d NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric imaging of adjustor group on day (c) 21 and (d) 28. e NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric analysis of different groups on day 14 (n = 15, 6, and 9 mice for PBS, non-responder, and responder group, respectively). f Correlation between NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric signal and relative tumor volumes via a simple linear regression model. Centre line in black shows the best-fit linear regression, and error band in gray shows 95% confidence intervals of linear regression line. R and ρ values were derived using a simple linear regression model. g NIR-IIb fluorescence quantification and (h) NIR-IIb ratiometric analysis of adjustor group (n = 3 mice). i Ex vivo NIR-IIb fluorescence ratiometric analysis of tumors from different groups. j Tumor growth curves, k excised tumor weight, l body weight changes, and (m) survival rates of different groups (n = 15, 3, 3, and 9 mice for PBS, non-adjustor, adjustor, and responder group, respectively). Absolute tumor volume measured for each group is included in Source Data file. n Flow cytometric assay of TANs, TAMs, and CD8+ Ts from different groups. o H&E/TUNEL/Ki-67 staining and TANs/CD8+ Ts staining of tumors from different groups. Experiments were repeated three times independently with similar results (i and o). Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (e−l). Data are compared through one-way ANOVA using Tukey’s post-hoc test (e−k), Dunnett’s comparison test (j), and log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test (m). P-values (non-responder vs. responder) in F808ex, F980ex, and ratiometric signal detection are <0.0001, 0.9699, and <0.0001 (e). P-values (day 21 vs. day 28) in F808ex, F980ex, and ratiometric signal detection are 0.0141, 0.8477, and 0.0016 (g, h). P-values (non-adjustor vs. responder) are 0.0103 (j), <0.0001 (k), and 0.0002 (m).

Back to article page