Literature DB >> 25925493

Molecular imaging of tumors with nanobodies and antibodies: Timing and dosage are crucial factors for improved in vivo detection.

Peter Bannas1, Alexander Lenz1,2, Valentin Kunick1,2, Lennart Well1,2, William Fumey1,2, Björn Rissiek2,3, Friedrich Haag2, Joanna Schmid1,2, Kerstin Schütze1,2, Anna Eichhoff2, Martin Trepel4, Gerhard Adam1, Harald Ittrich1, Friedrich Koch-Nolte2.   

Abstract

The utility of nanobodies and conventional antibodies for in vivo imaging is well known, but optimum dosing and timing schedules for one versus the other have not been established. We aimed to improve specific tumor imaging in vivo with nanobodies and conventional antibodies using near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging. We used ARTC2 expressed on lymphoma cells as a model target antigen. ARTC2-specific nanobody s+16a and conventional antibody Nika102 were labeled with NIRF-dye AF680. In vivo NIRF-imaging of ARTC2-positive and ARTC2-negative xenografts was performed over 24 h post-injection of 5, 10, 25, or 50 µg of each conjugate. Specific target-binding and tissue-penetration were verified by NIRF imaging ex vivo, flow cytometry and fluorescence microscopy. NIRF-imaging of s+16a(680) in vivo revealed a six times faster tumor accumulation than of Nika102(680). Using 50 µg of s+16a(680) increased the specific signals of ARTC2-positive tumors without increasing background signals, allowing a tumor-to-background (T/B) ratio of 12.4 ± 4.2 within 6 h post-injection. Fifty micrograms of Nika102(680) increased specific signals of ARTC2-positive tumors but also of ARTC2-negative tumors and background, thereby limiting the T/B ratio to 6.1 ± 2.0. Ten micrograms of Nika102(680) only slightly reduced specific tumor signals but dramatically reduced background signals. Ex vivo analyses confirmed a faster and deeper tumor penetration with s+16a(680). Using nanobody s+16a allowed same-day imaging with a high T/B ratio, whereas antibody Nika102 gave optimal imaging results only 24 h post injection. Nanobody s+16a required a high dose, whereas antibody Nika102 had the best T/B-ratio at a low dose. Therefore, timing and dosage should be addressed when comparing nanobodies and conventional antibodies for molecular imaging purposes.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Nanobody; VHH; animal model; antibody; fluorescence imaging; molecular imaging; xenograft

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25925493     DOI: 10.1002/cmmi.1637

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1555-4309            Impact factor:   3.161


  18 in total

1.  Imaging of Tumor Spheroids, Dual-Isotope SPECT, and Autoradiographic Analysis to Assess the Tumor Uptake and Distribution of Different Nanobodies.

Authors:  Irati Beltrán Hernández; Rene Rompen; Raffaella Rossin; Katerina T Xenaki; Eugene A Katrukha; Klaas Nicolay; Paul van Bergen En Henegouwen; Holger Grüll; Sabrina Oliveira
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  PET imaging of distinct brain uptake of a nanobody and similarly-sized PAMAM dendrimers after intra-arterial administration.

Authors:  Wojciech G Lesniak; Chengyan Chu; Anna Jablonska; Babak Behnam Azad; Olivier Zwaenepoel; Michal Zawadzki; Ala Lisok; Martin G Pomper; Piotr Walczak; Jan Gettemans; Miroslaw Janowski
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-06-03       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Improved Debulking of Peritoneal Tumor Implants by Near-Infrared Fluorescent Nanobody Image Guidance in an Experimental Mouse Model.

Authors:  Pieterjan Debie; Marian Vanhoeij; Natalie Poortmans; Janik Puttemans; Kris Gillis; Nick Devoogdt; Tony Lahoutte; Sophie Hernot
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.488

4.  Half-Life Extended Nanobody-Based CD38-Specific Bispecific Killercell Engagers Induce Killing of Multiple Myeloma Cells.

Authors:  Julia Hambach; William Fumey; Tobias Stähler; Anna Josephine Gebhardt; Gerhard Adam; Katja Weisel; Friedrich Koch-Nolte; Peter Bannas
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 8.786

Review 5.  Nanobodies in cancer.

Authors:  Elisha R Verhaar; Andrew W Woodham; Hidde L Ploegh
Journal:  Semin Immunol       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 11.130

6.  Nanobodies effectively modulate the enzymatic activity of CD38 and allow specific imaging of CD38+ tumors in mouse models in vivo.

Authors:  William Fumey; Julia Koenigsdorf; Valentin Kunick; Stephan Menzel; Kerstin Schütze; Mandy Unger; Levin Schriewer; Friedrich Haag; Gerhard Adam; Anna Oberle; Mascha Binder; Ralf Fliegert; Andreas Guse; Yong Juan Zhao; Hon Cheung Lee; Fabio Malavasi; Fernando Goldbaum; Rob van Hegelsom; Catelijne Stortelers; Peter Bannas; Friedrich Koch-Nolte
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Development of a human antibody fragment directed against the alpha folate receptor as a promising molecule for targeted application.

Authors:  Nattihda Parakasikron; Chatchai Chaotham; Pithi Chanvorachote; Chanida Vinayanuwattikun; Visarut Buranasudja; Pornchanok Taweecheep; Kannika Khantasup
Journal:  Drug Deliv       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 6.419

Review 8.  Nanobodies: new avenue to treat kidney disease.

Authors:  Nicola Wanner; Thomas Eden; Nastassia Liaukouskaya; Friedrich Koch-Nolte
Journal:  Cell Tissue Res       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 4.051

Review 9.  Nanobodies and Nanobody-Based Human Heavy Chain Antibodies As Antitumor Therapeutics.

Authors:  Peter Bannas; Julia Hambach; Friedrich Koch-Nolte
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 7.561

Review 10.  Nanobody-Based Biologics for Modulating Purinergic Signaling in Inflammation and Immunity.

Authors:  Stephan Menzel; Nicole Schwarz; Friedrich Haag; Friedrich Koch-Nolte
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 5.810

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.