Literature DB >> 20809210

Quantitating antibody uptake in vivo: conditional dependence on antigen expression levels.

Greg M Thurber1, Ralph Weissleder.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Antibodies form an important class of cancer therapeutics, and there is intense interest in using them for imaging applications in diagnosis and monitoring of cancer treatment. Despite the expanding body of knowledge describing pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions of antibodies in vivo, discrepancies remain over the effect of antigen expression level on tumoral uptake with some reports indicating a relationship between uptake and expression and others showing no correlation. PROCEDURES: Using a cell line with high epithelial cell adhesion molecule expression and moderate epidermal growth factor receptor expression, fluorescent antibodies with similar plasma clearance were imaged in vivo. A mathematical model and mouse xenograft experiments were used to describe the effect of antigen expression on uptake of these high-affinity antibodies.
RESULTS: As predicted by the theoretical model, under subsaturating conditions, uptake of the antibodies in such tumors is similar because localization of both probes is limited by delivery from the vasculature. In a separate experiment, when the tumor is saturated, the uptake becomes dependent on the number of available binding sites. In addition, targeting of small micrometastases is shown to be higher than larger vascularized tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with the prediction that high affinity antibody uptake is dependent on antigen expression levels for saturating doses and delivery for subsaturating doses. It is imperative for any probe to understand whether quantitative uptake is a measure of biomarker expression or transport to the region of interest. The data provide support for a predictive theoretical model of antibody uptake, enabling it to be used as a starting point for the design of more efficacious therapies and timely quantitative imaging probes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 20809210      PMCID: PMC3000888          DOI: 10.1007/s11307-010-0397-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol        ISSN: 1536-1632            Impact factor:   3.488


  43 in total

1.  Relationship between tumour morphology, antigen and antibody distribution measured by fusion of digital phosphor and photographic images.

Authors:  A A Flynn; G M Boxer; R H Begent; R B Pedley
Journal:  Cancer Immunol Immunother       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 6.968

2.  Interstitial fluid concentrations of albumin and immunoglobulin G in normal men.

Authors:  H L Poulsen
Journal:  Scand J Clin Lab Invest       Date:  1974-10       Impact factor: 1.713

3.  Morphometric analyses of the microvasculature of tumors during growth and after x-irradiation.

Authors:  D E Hilmas; E L Gillette
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Pharmacokinetic analysis of immunotoxin uptake in solid tumors: role of plasma kinetics, capillary permeability, and binding.

Authors:  C Sung; R J Youle; R L Dedrick
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1990-11-15       Impact factor: 12.701

5.  A fluorescent residualizing label for studies on protein uptake and catabolism in vivo and in vitro.

Authors:  J L Maxwell; L Terracio; T K Borg; J W Baynes; S R Thorpe
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  1990-04-01       Impact factor: 3.857

6.  Imaging the pharmacodynamics of HER2 degradation in response to Hsp90 inhibitors.

Authors:  Peter M Smith-Jones; David B Solit; Timothy Akhurst; Farzana Afroze; Neal Rosen; Steven M Larson
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2004-05-09       Impact factor: 54.908

7.  Vascularization of the continuous human colonic cancer cell line LS 174 T deposited subcutaneously in nude rats.

Authors:  H Ahlström; R Christofferson; L E Lörelius
Journal:  APMIS       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 3.205

8.  Molecular imaging and biological evaluation of HuMV833 anti-VEGF antibody: implications for trial design of antiangiogenic antibodies.

Authors:  Gordon C Jayson; Jamal Zweit; Alan Jackson; Clive Mulatero; Peter Julyan; Malcolm Ranson; Lynn Broughton; John Wagstaff; Leif Hakannson; Gerard Groenewegen; John Bailey; Nigel Smith; David Hastings; Jeremy Lawrance; Hamied Haroon; Tim Ward; Alan T McGown; Meina Tang; Dan Levitt; Sandrine Marreaud; Frederic F Lehmann; Manfred Herold; Heinz Zwierzina
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-10-02       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Transport of fluid and macromolecules in tumors. I. Role of interstitial pressure and convection.

Authors:  L T Baxter; R K Jain
Journal:  Microvasc Res       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 3.514

10.  Selective molecular imaging of viable cancer cells with pH-activatable fluorescence probes.

Authors:  Yasuteru Urano; Daisuke Asanuma; Yukihiro Hama; Yoshinori Koyama; Tristan Barrett; Mako Kamiya; Tetsuo Nagano; Toshiaki Watanabe; Akira Hasegawa; Peter L Choyke; Hisataka Kobayashi
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2008-12-07       Impact factor: 53.440

View more
  34 in total

1.  A mechanistic compartmental model for total antibody uptake in tumors.

Authors:  Greg M Thurber; K Dane Wittrup
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2012-09-06       Impact factor: 2.691

Review 2.  Imaging the dynamics of endocytosis in live mammalian tissues.

Authors:  Roberto Weigert
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 10.005

Review 3.  Imaging the pharmacology of nanomaterials by intravital microscopy: Toward understanding their biological behavior.

Authors:  Miles A Miller; Ralph Weissleder
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2016-06-04       Impact factor: 15.470

4.  Characterizing the detection threshold for optical imaging in surgical oncology.

Authors:  Andrew C Prince; Aditi Jani; Melissa Korb; Kiranya E Tipirneni; Benjamin B Kasten; Eben L Rosenthal; Jason M Warram
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 3.454

5.  Development and Application of a Novel Model System to Study "Active" and "Passive" Tumor Targeting.

Authors:  Amarnath Mukherjee; Binod Kumar; Koji Hatano; Luisa M Russell; Bruce J Trock; Peter C Searson; Alan K Meeker; Martin G Pomper; Shawn E Lupold
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 6.261

6.  Pairwise comparison of 89Zr- and 124I-labeled cG250 based on positron emission tomography imaging and nonlinear immunokinetic modeling: in vivo carbonic anhydrase IX receptor binding and internalization in mouse xenografts of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Sarah M Cheal; Blesida Punzalan; Michael G Doran; Michael J Evans; Joseph R Osborne; Jason S Lewis; Pat Zanzonico; Steven M Larson
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 9.236

7.  Advantages of a dual-tracer model over reference tissue models for binding potential measurement in tumors.

Authors:  K M Tichauer; K S Samkoe; W S Klubben; T Hasan; B W Pogue
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Multichannel imaging to quantify four classes of pharmacokinetic distribution in tumors.

Authors:  Sumit Bhatnagar; Emily Deschenes; Jianshan Liao; Cornelius Cilliers; Greg M Thurber
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 3.534

9.  Improved Tumor Penetration and Single-Cell Targeting of Antibody-Drug Conjugates Increases Anticancer Efficacy and Host Survival.

Authors:  Cornelius Cilliers; Bruna Menezes; Ian Nessler; Jennifer Linderman; Greg M Thurber
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 12.701

10.  Effect of small-molecule modification on single-cell pharmacokinetics of PARP inhibitors.

Authors:  Greg M Thurber; Thomas Reiner; Katherine S Yang; Rainer H Kohler; Ralph Weissleder
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 6.261

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.