AIM: In the present study we demonstrate the in vitro and in vivo comparison of the (44)Sc and (68)Ga labeled DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2). (44)Sc is a positron emitter with a half life of 3.92 h. Hence it could be used for PET imaging with ligands requiring longer observation time than in the case of (68)Ga. METHODS: The binding affinity of (nat)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) and (nat)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) to GRP receptors was studied in competition to [(125)I-Tyr(4)]-Bombesin in the human prostate cancer cell line PC-3. A preliminary biodistribution in normal rats was performed, while first microPET images were assessed in male Copenhagen rats bearing the androgen-independent Dunning R-3327-AT-1 prostate cancer tumor. RESULTS: The affinity to GRP receptors in the PC-3 cell line was higher for (nat)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) (IC(50)(nM)=0.85 ± 0.06) than that of (nat)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) (IC(50) (nM)=6.49 ± 0.13). The internalization rate of (68)Ga labeled DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) was slower than that of (44)Sc, but their final internalization percents were comparable. (68)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) was externalized faster than (44)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2). The biodistribution of (44)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) and (68)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) in normal rats revealed a higher uptake in target organs and tissues of the first one while both excreted mainly through urinary tract. In microPET images both tracers were accumulated in the tumor with similar uptake patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the differences in the receptor affinity both the (68)Ga- and the (44)Sc-labeled DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) tracers showed comparable distribution and similar time constants of uptake and elimination. Moreover no differences in tumor accumulation (neither in the overall uptake nor in the dynamics) were observed from the microPet imaging. From that perspective the use of either (44)Sc or (68)Ga for detecting tumors with GRP receptors is equivalent.
AIM: In the present study we demonstrate the in vitro and in vivo comparison of the (44)Sc and (68)Ga labeled DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2). (44)Sc is a positron emitter with a half life of 3.92 h. Hence it could be used for PET imaging with ligands requiring longer observation time than in the case of (68)Ga. METHODS: The binding affinity of (nat)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) and (nat)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) to GRP receptors was studied in competition to [(125)I-Tyr(4)]-Bombesin in the humanprostate cancer cell line PC-3. A preliminary biodistribution in normal rats was performed, while first microPET images were assessed in male Copenhagen rats bearing the androgen-independent Dunning R-3327-AT-1 prostate cancer tumor. RESULTS: The affinity to GRP receptors in the PC-3 cell line was higher for (nat)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) (IC(50)(nM)=0.85 ± 0.06) than that of (nat)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) (IC(50) (nM)=6.49 ± 0.13). The internalization rate of (68)Ga labeled DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) was slower than that of (44)Sc, but their final internalization percents were comparable. (68)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) was externalized faster than (44)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2). The biodistribution of (44)Sc-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) and (68)Ga-DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) in normal rats revealed a higher uptake in target organs and tissues of the first one while both excreted mainly through urinary tract. In microPET images both tracers were accumulated in the tumor with similar uptake patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the differences in the receptor affinity both the (68)Ga- and the (44)Sc-labeled DOTA-BN[2-14]NH(2) tracers showed comparable distribution and similar time constants of uptake and elimination. Moreover no differences in tumor accumulation (neither in the overall uptake nor in the dynamics) were observed from the microPet imaging. From that perspective the use of either (44)Sc or (68)Ga for detecting tumors with GRP receptors is equivalent.
Authors: Katharina A Domnanich; Cristina Müller; Renata Farkas; Raffaella M Schmid; Bernard Ponsard; Roger Schibli; Andreas Türler; Nicholas P van der Meulen Journal: EJNMMI Radiopharm Chem Date: 2016-05-05
Authors: Piotr F J Lipiński; Piotr Garnuszek; Michał Maurin; Raphael Stoll; Nils Metzler-Nolte; Artur Wodyński; Jan Cz Dobrowolski; Marta K Dudek; Monika Orzełowska; Renata Mikołajczak Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2018-04-16 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Euy Sung Moon; Yentl Van Rymenant; Sandeep Battan; Joni De Loose; An Bracke; Pieter Van der Veken; Ingrid De Meester; Frank Rösch Journal: Molecules Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 4.411