PURPOSE: Radiolabelled Affibody molecules have demonstrated a potential for visualization of tumour-associated molecular targets. Affibody molecules (7 kDa) are composed of three alpha-helices. Recently, a smaller two-helix variant of Affibody molecules (5.1 kDa) was developed. The aim of this study was to compare two- and three-helix HER2-targeting Affibody molecules directly in vivo. METHODS: The three-helix Affibody molecule ABY-002 and the two-helix Affibody molecule PEP09239 were labelled with (111)In at the N-termini via DOTA chelator. Tumour-targeting properties were directly compared at 1 and 4 h after injection in mice bearing SKOV-3 xenografts with high HER2 expression and LS174T xenografts with low HER2 expression. RESULTS: The dissociation constants (K(D)) for HER2 binding were 78 pM for the three-helix Affibody molecule and 2.1 nM for the two-helix Affibody molecule. (111)In-PEP09239 cleared more rapidly from the blood. In xenografts with high HER2 expression, the uptake of (111)In-ABY-002 was significantly higher than that of (111)In-PEP09239. The tumour-to-blood ratio was higher for (111)In-PEP09239 at 4 h after injection, while there was no significant difference in other tumour-to-organ ratios. The tumour uptake of (111)In-ABY-002 was eightfold higher than that of (111)In-PEP09239 in xenografts with low expression. Tumour-to-blood ratios were equal in this case, but other tumour-to-organ ratios were appreciably higher for the three-helix variant. CONCLUSION: For tumours with high HER2 expression, two-helix HER2-targeting Affibody molecules can provide higher tumour-to-blood ratio at the cost of lower tumour uptake. In the case of low expression, both tumour uptake and tumour-to-organ ratios are appreciably higher for three-helix than for two-helix HER2-targeting Affibody molecules.
PURPOSE: Radiolabelled Affibody molecules have demonstrated a potential for visualization of tumour-associated molecular targets. Affibody molecules (7 kDa) are composed of three alpha-helices. Recently, a smaller two-helix variant of Affibody molecules (5.1 kDa) was developed. The aim of this study was to compare two- and three-helix HER2-targeting Affibody molecules directly in vivo. METHODS: The three-helix Affibody molecule ABY-002 and the two-helix Affibody molecule PEP09239 were labelled with (111)In at the N-termini via DOTA chelator. Tumour-targeting properties were directly compared at 1 and 4 h after injection in mice bearing SKOV-3 xenografts with high HER2 expression and LS174T xenografts with low HER2 expression. RESULTS: The dissociation constants (K(D)) for HER2 binding were 78 pM for the three-helix Affibody molecule and 2.1 nM for the two-helix Affibody molecule. (111)In-PEP09239 cleared more rapidly from the blood. In xenografts with high HER2 expression, the uptake of (111)In-ABY-002 was significantly higher than that of (111)In-PEP09239. The tumour-to-blood ratio was higher for (111)In-PEP09239 at 4 h after injection, while there was no significant difference in other tumour-to-organ ratios. The tumour uptake of (111)In-ABY-002 was eightfold higher than that of (111)In-PEP09239 in xenografts with low expression. Tumour-to-blood ratios were equal in this case, but other tumour-to-organ ratios were appreciably higher for the three-helix variant. CONCLUSION: For tumours with high HER2 expression, two-helix HER2-targeting Affibody molecules can provide higher tumour-to-blood ratio at the cost of lower tumour uptake. In the case of low expression, both tumour uptake and tumour-to-organ ratios are appreciably higher for three-helix than for two-helix HER2-targeting Affibody molecules.
Authors: D J Slamon; W Godolphin; L A Jones; J A Holt; S G Wong; D E Keith; W J Levin; S G Stuart; J Udove; A Ullrich Journal: Science Date: 1989-05-12 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Sarah Minner; Birte Jessen; Lars Stiedenroth; Eike Burandt; Jens Köllermann; Martina Mirlacher; Andreas Erbersdobler; Christian Eichelberg; Margit Fisch; Tim Henrik Brümmendorf; Carsten Bokemeyer; Ronald Simon; Thomas Steuber; Markus Graefen; Hartwig Huland; Guido Sauter; Thorsten Schlomm Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-02-23 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; Jared N Schwartz; Karen L Hagerty; D Craig Allred; Richard J Cote; Mitchell Dowsett; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Wedad M Hanna; Amy Langer; Lisa M McShane; Soonmyung Paik; Mark D Pegram; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Anthony Rhodes; Catharine Sturgeon; Sheila E Taube; Raymond Tubbs; Gail H Vance; Marc van de Vijver; Thomas M Wheeler; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-12-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anna Orlova; Mikaela Magnusson; Tove L J Eriksson; Martin Nilsson; Barbro Larsson; Ingmarie Höidén-Guthenberg; Charles Widström; Jörgen Carlsson; Vladimir Tolmachev; Stefan Ståhl; Fredrik Y Nilsson Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-04-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Sara Ahlgren; Helena Wållberg; Thuy A Tran; Charles Widström; Magnus Hjertman; Lars Abrahmsén; Dietmar Berndorff; Ludger M Dinkelborg; John E Cyr; Joachim Feldwisch; Anna Orlova; Vladimir Tolmachev Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-04-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Dominik Summer; Javad Garousi; Maryam Oroujeni; Bogdan Mitran; Ken G Andersson; Anzhelika Vorobyeva; John Löfblom; Anna Orlova; Vladimir Tolmachev; Clemens Decristoforo Journal: Mol Pharm Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 4.939