PURPOSE: The biodistribution and tumour uptake of a series of 16alpha-[(18)F]fluoroestradiol ([18F]FES) derivatives was determined in oestrogen receptors-positive (ER+) tumour-bearing mice to assess the impact of substituents, formulation and specific activity on target tissue uptake. METHODS: MC4-L2 and MC7-L1 murine ER+ cells were inoculated in Balb/c mice. The animals were injected with various [(18)F]FES derivatives substituted with 2- or 4-fluorine and/or an 11beta-methoxy group. The radiopharmaceuticals were formulated in 10% ethanol/saline or 10% ethanol/lipid emulsion. The organs were counted, and radioactivity concentrations were expressed as the percentage of the injected dose per gram tissue (%ID/g). To estimate the effect of specific activity on tumour uptake, the 4-fluoro-11beta-methoxy-16alpha-[(18)F]-fluoroestradiol (4F-M[(18)F]FES) was co-injected with different concentrations of non-radioactive estradiol to give an in vivo competitive inhibition curve. RESULTS: 4F-M[(18)F]FES exhibited the highest average uterine uptake (%ID/g = 15.7 +/- 2.1). The highest uptake by the two mammary tumours was observed with [(18)F]FES (%ID/g = 3.1 and 3.4 +/- 0.3) and 11beta-methoxy-16alpha[(18)F]-fluoroestradiol (M-[(18)F]FES) (%ID/g = 3.2 and 3.3 +/- 0.6), followed by 4F-M[(18)F]FES (%ID/g = 2.5 and 2.3 +/- 0.3). The formulation had little influence on the biodistribution pattern. Co-injection with a total mass of estradiol >10(-10) mol blocked 4F-M[(18)F]FES tumour uptake. CONCLUSION: All of the radiolabelled estradiol derivatives achieved significant target tissue uptake in vivo, both in ER+ tumours and the uterus. The formulation had little impact on the biodistribution of these compounds but some compounds (4F-M[(18)F]FES, M-[(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FES) had more favourable target tissue uptake and target-to-background ratios.
PURPOSE: The biodistribution and tumour uptake of a series of 16alpha-[(18)F]fluoroestradiol ([18F]FES) derivatives was determined in oestrogen receptors-positive (ER+) tumour-bearing mice to assess the impact of substituents, formulation and specific activity on target tissue uptake. METHODS: MC4-L2 and MC7-L1 murine ER+ cells were inoculated in Balb/c mice. The animals were injected with various [(18)F]FES derivatives substituted with 2- or 4-fluorine and/or an 11beta-methoxy group. The radiopharmaceuticals were formulated in 10% ethanol/saline or 10% ethanol/lipid emulsion. The organs were counted, and radioactivity concentrations were expressed as the percentage of the injected dose per gram tissue (%ID/g). To estimate the effect of specific activity on tumour uptake, the 4-fluoro-11beta-methoxy-16alpha-[(18)F]-fluoroestradiol (4F-M[(18)F]FES) was co-injected with different concentrations of non-radioactive estradiol to give an in vivo competitive inhibition curve. RESULTS: 4F-M[(18)F]FES exhibited the highest average uterine uptake (%ID/g = 15.7 +/- 2.1). The highest uptake by the two mammary tumours was observed with [(18)F]FES (%ID/g = 3.1 and 3.4 +/- 0.3) and 11beta-methoxy-16alpha[(18)F]-fluoroestradiol (M-[(18)F]FES) (%ID/g = 3.2 and 3.3 +/- 0.6), followed by 4F-M[(18)F]FES (%ID/g = 2.5 and 2.3 +/- 0.3). The formulation had little influence on the biodistribution pattern. Co-injection with a total mass of estradiol >10(-10) mol blocked 4F-M[(18)F]FES tumour uptake. CONCLUSION: All of the radiolabelled estradiol derivatives achieved significant target tissue uptake in vivo, both in ER+ tumours and the uterus. The formulation had little impact on the biodistribution of these compounds but some compounds (4F-M[(18)F]FES, M-[(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FES) had more favourable target tissue uptake and target-to-background ratios.
Authors: Hannah M Linden; Svetlana A Stekhova; Jeanne M Link; Julie R Gralow; Robert B Livingston; Georgiana K Ellis; Philip H Petra; Lanell M Peterson; Erin K Schubert; Lisa K Dunnwald; Kenneth A Krohn; David A Mankoff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Yann Seimbille; Jacques Rousseau; François Bénard; Catherine Morin; Hasrat Ali; George Avvakumov; Geoffrey L Hammond; Johan E van Lier Journal: Steroids Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 2.668
Authors: Antonio Aliaga; Jacques A Rousseau; René Ouellette; Jules Cadorette; Johan E van Lier; Roger Lecomte; Francois Bénard Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Roelof J Bennink; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Leonie J Rijks; Arnold L Noorduyn; Anton G Janssen; Gerrit W Sloof Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Michel Paquette; Éric Lavallée; Serge Phoenix; René Ouellet; Helena Senta; Johan E van Lier; Brigitte Guérin; Roger Lecomte; Éric E Turcotte Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-08-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Michel Paquette; Serge Phoenix; René Ouellet; Réjean Langlois; Johan E van Lier; Eric E Turcotte; Francois Bénard; Roger Lecomte Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Nilasha Banerjee; Humphrey Fonge; Andrew Mikhail; Raymond M Reilly; Reina Bendayan; Christine Allen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 3.240