UNLABELLED: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is highly expressed in prostate cancer, and small-molecule radiopharmaceuticals targeting PSMA rapidly detect the location and extent of disease. Here we evaluated preclinically 4 novel (99m)Tc-labeled small-molecule inhibitors of PSMA with the potential for clinical translation for molecular imaging of prostate cancer in humans. METHODS: Four PSMA inhibitors derived from the glutamate-urea-glutamate or glutamate-urea-lysine pharmacophores conjugated to CIM or TIM chelators were radiolabeled with (99m)Tc and evaluated in vitro and in vivo. RESULTS: High-affinity, saturable binding to PSMA on LNCaP cells was observed with Kd values of 0.64 ± 0.46 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1427, 1.07 ± 0.89 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1404, 1.75 ± 0.32 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1428, and 4.35 ± 0.35 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1405. (99m)Tc-labeled PSMA inhibitors did not bind human prostate cancer PC3 cells, which lack PSMA, demonstrating specificity, and binding was abolished with 2-(phosphonomethyl)pentanedioic acid (PMPA), a structurally unrelated PSMA inhibitor. (99m)Tc-labeled PSMA inhibitors were shown to internalize at 37 °C. Uptake in LNCaP xenografts ranged from 9.3% to 12.4% injected dose per gram at 1 h after injection and from 7.2% to 11.0% at 4 h, with tumor-to-blood ratios ranging from 29:1 to 550:1 and tumor-to-skeletal muscle ratios ranging from 31:1 to 157:1 at 4 h. (99m)Tc-MIP-1404 exhibited the best combination of high tumor uptake and rapid clearance from kidney and nontarget tissues. (99m)Tc-MIP-1404 specifically bound to PSMA in vivo as demonstrated by the absence of uptake in PC3 xenografts and by competition with PMPA. SPECT/CT imaging corroborated the tissue distribution results, demonstrating uptake only in PSMA-expressing kidney and tumor tissue and clearance through the urinary bladder. CONCLUSION: These (99m)Tc-labeled radiopharmaceuticals targeting PSMA may provide a SPECT molecular imaging option to assist in the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer and the management of patient care by monitoring disease progression.
UNLABELLED: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is highly expressed in prostate cancer, and small-molecule radiopharmaceuticals targeting PSMA rapidly detect the location and extent of disease. Here we evaluated preclinically 4 novel (99m)Tc-labeled small-molecule inhibitors of PSMA with the potential for clinical translation for molecular imaging of prostate cancer in humans. METHODS: Four PSMA inhibitors derived from the glutamate-urea-glutamate or glutamate-urea-lysine pharmacophores conjugated to CIM or TIM chelators were radiolabeled with (99m)Tc and evaluated in vitro and in vivo. RESULTS: High-affinity, saturable binding to PSMA on LNCaP cells was observed with Kd values of 0.64 ± 0.46 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1427, 1.07 ± 0.89 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1404, 1.75 ± 0.32 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1428, and 4.35 ± 0.35 nM for (99m)Tc-MIP-1405. (99m)Tc-labeled PSMA inhibitors did not bind humanprostate cancer PC3 cells, which lack PSMA, demonstrating specificity, and binding was abolished with 2-(phosphonomethyl)pentanedioic acid (PMPA), a structurally unrelated PSMA inhibitor. (99m)Tc-labeled PSMA inhibitors were shown to internalize at 37 °C. Uptake in LNCaP xenografts ranged from 9.3% to 12.4% injected dose per gram at 1 h after injection and from 7.2% to 11.0% at 4 h, with tumor-to-blood ratios ranging from 29:1 to 550:1 and tumor-to-skeletal muscle ratios ranging from 31:1 to 157:1 at 4 h. (99m)Tc-MIP-1404 exhibited the best combination of high tumor uptake and rapid clearance from kidney and nontarget tissues. (99m)Tc-MIP-1404 specifically bound to PSMA in vivo as demonstrated by the absence of uptake in PC3 xenografts and by competition with PMPA. SPECT/CT imaging corroborated the tissue distribution results, demonstrating uptake only in PSMA-expressing kidney and tumor tissue and clearance through the urinary bladder. CONCLUSION: These (99m)Tc-labeled radiopharmaceuticals targeting PSMA may provide a SPECT molecular imaging option to assist in the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer and the management of patient care by monitoring disease progression.
Authors: Francisco Osvaldo García-Pérez; Jenny Davanzo; Sergio López-Buenrostro; Clara Santos-Cuevas; Guillermina Ferro-Flores; Miguel A Jímenez-Ríos; Anna Scavuzzo; Zael Santana-Ríos; Sevastián Medina-Ornelas Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-10-20
Authors: Xing Yang; Ronnie C Mease; Mrudula Pullambhatla; Ala Lisok; Ying Chen; Catherine A Foss; Yuchuan Wang; Hassan Shallal; Hannah Edelman; Adam T Hoye; Giorgio Attardo; Sridhar Nimmagadda; Martin G Pomper Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Catharina M van Rij; Cathelijne Frielink; David M Goldenberg; Robert M Sharkey; Gerben M Franssen; Susanne Lütje; William J McBride; Wim J G Oyen; Otto C Boerman Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Xinning Wang; Steve S Huang; Warren D W Heston; Hong Guo; Bing-Cheng Wang; James P Basilion Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2014-09-19 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Michael Mix; Kathrin Reichel; Christian Stoykow; Mark Bartholomä; Vanessa Drendel; Eleni Gourni; Ulrich Wetterauer; Wolfgang Schultze-Seemann; Philipp T Meyer; Cordula A Jilg Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-07-30 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Thomas A Hope; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Matthias Eiber; Louise Emmett; Wolfgang P Fendler; Courtney Lawhn-Heath; Steven P Rowe Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2018-06-27 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Steven P Rowe; Alexander Drzezga; Bernd Neumaier; Markus Dietlein; Michael A Gorin; Michael R Zalutsky; Martin G Pomper Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 10.057