Discriminating sterile inflammation from infection, especially in cases of aseptic loosening versus an actual prosthetic joint infection, is challenging and has significant treatment implications. Our goal was to evaluate a novel human monoclonal antibody (mAb) probe directed against the Gram-positive bacterial surface molecule lipoteichoic acid (LTA). Specificity and affinity were assessed in vitro. We then radiolabeled the anti-LTA mAb and evaluated its effectiveness as a diagnostic imaging tool for detecting infection via immunoPET imaging in an in vivo mouse model of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). In vitro and ex vivo binding of the anti-LTA mAb to pathogenic bacteria was measured with Octet, ELISA, and flow cytometry. The in vivo PJI mouse model was assessed using traditional imaging modalities, including positron emission tomography (PET) with [18F]FDG and [18F]NaF as well as X-ray computed tomography (CT), before being evaluated with the zirconium-89-labeled antibody specific for LTA ([89Zr]SAC55). The anti-LTA mAb exhibited specific binding in vitro to LTA-expressing bacteria. Results from imaging showed that our model could reliably simulate infection at the surgical site by bioluminescent imaging, conventional PET tracer imaging, and bone morphological changes by CT. One day following injection of both the radiolabeled anti-LTA and isotype control antibodies, the anti-LTA antibody demonstrated significantly greater (P < 0.05) uptake at S. aureus-infected prosthesis sites over either the same antibody at sterile prosthesis sites or of control non-specific antibody at infected prosthesis sites. Taken together, the radiolabeled anti-LTA mAb, [89Zr]SAC55, may serve as a valuable diagnostic molecular imaging probe to help distinguish between sterile inflammation and infection in the setting of PJI. Future studies are needed to determine whether these findings will translate to human PJI.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 June 2025.
All research outputs
#6,686,304
of 34,115,020 outputs
Outputs from Bone Research
#193
of 561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,494
of 369,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bone Research
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,115,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 561 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 369,575 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
