Literature DB >> 26062933

Biodistribution of the ¹⁸F-FPPRGD₂ PET radiopharmaceutical in cancer patients: an atlas of SUV measurements.

Ryogo Minamimoto1,2, Mehran Jamali3,4, Amir Barkhodari3, Camila Mosci3, Erik Mittra3, Bin Shen4, Frederick Chin4, Sanjiv Sam Gambhir3,4, Andrei Iagaru5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the biodistribution of 2-fluoropropionyl-labeled PEGylated dimeric arginine-glycine-aspartic acid (RGD) peptide (PEG3-E[c{RGDyk}]2) ((18)F-FPPRGD2) in cancer patients and to compare its uptake in malignant lesions with (18)F-FDG uptake.
METHODS: A total of 35 patients (11 men, 24 women, mean age 52.1 ± 10.8 years) were enrolled prospectively and had (18)F-FPPRGD2 PET/CT prior to treatment. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) and mean SUV (SUVmean) were measured in 23 normal tissues in each patient, as well as in known or suspected cancer lesions. Differences between (18)F-FPPRGD2 uptake and (18)F-FDG uptake were also evaluated in 28 of the 35 patients.
RESULTS: Areas of high (18)F-FPPRGD2 accumulation (SUVmax range 8.9 - 94.4, SUVmean range 7.1 - 64.4) included the bladder and kidneys. Moderate uptake (SUVmax range 2.1 - 6.3, SUVmean range 1.1 - 4.5) was found in the choroid plexus, salivary glands, thyroid, liver, spleen, pancreas, small bowel and skeleton. Compared with (18)F-FDG, (18)F-FPPRGD2 showed higher tumor-to-background ratio in brain lesions (13.4 ± 8.5 vs. 1.1 ± 0.5, P < 0.001), but no significant difference in body lesions (3.2 ± 1.9 vs. 4.4 ± 4.2, P = 0.10). There was no significant correlation between the uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean) for (18)F FPPRGD2 and those for (18)F-FDG.
CONCLUSION: The biodistribution of (18)F-FPPRGD2 in cancer patients is similar to that of other RGD dimer peptides and it is suitable for clinical use. The lack of significant correlation between (18)F-FPPRGD2 and (18)F-FDG uptake confirms that the information provided by each PET tracer is different.

Entities:  

Keywords:  18F-FPPRGD2 PET/CT; Angiogenesis; Atlas; PET/CT; αvβ3 integrin expression

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26062933     DOI: 10.1007/s00259-015-3096-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


  52 in total

1.  Quantitative PET imaging of tumor integrin alphavbeta3 expression with 18F-FRGD2.

Authors:  Xianzhong Zhang; Zhengming Xiong; Yun Wu; Weibo Cai; Jeffery R Tseng; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Xiaoyuan Chen
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 10.057

2.  Vascular expression of the alpha(v)beta(3)-integrin in lung and other organs.

Authors:  B Singh; C Fu; J Bhattacharya
Journal:  Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.464

Review 3.  Normalization of tumor vasculature: an emerging concept in antiangiogenic therapy.

Authors:  Rakesh K Jain
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-01-07       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  (64)Cu-labeled tetrameric and octameric RGD peptides for small-animal PET of tumor alpha(v)beta(3) integrin expression.

Authors:  Zi-Bo Li; Weibo Cai; Qizhen Cao; Kai Chen; Zhanhong Wu; Lina He; Xiaoyuan Chen
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 10.057

5.  Disintegrin causes proteolysis of beta-catenin and apoptosis of endothelial cells. Involvement of cell-cell and cell-ECM interactions in regulating cell viability.

Authors:  Wen-Bin Wu; Hui-Chin Peng; Tur-Fu Huang
Journal:  Exp Cell Res       Date:  2003-05-15       Impact factor: 3.905

6.  18F-labeled mini-PEG spacered RGD dimer (18F-FPRGD2): synthesis and microPET imaging of alphavbeta3 integrin expression.

Authors:  Zhanhong Wu; Zi-Bo Li; Weibo Cai; Lina He; Frederick T Chin; Fang Li; Xiaoyuan Chen
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-05-05       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 7.  Multimodality imaging of tumor integrin alphavbeta3 expression.

Authors:  Xiaoyuan Chen
Journal:  Mini Rev Med Chem       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.862

8.  Requirement of vascular integrin alpha v beta 3 for angiogenesis.

Authors:  P C Brooks; R A Clark; D A Cheresh
Journal:  Science       Date:  1994-04-22       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Comparative evaluation of angiogenesis assessment with anti-factor-VIII and anti-CD31 immunostaining in non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  A Giatromanolaki; M I Koukourakis; D Theodossiou; K Barbatis; K O'Byrne; A L Harris; K C Gatter
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 12.531

10.  Activation of tumor cell integrin alphavbeta3 controls angiogenesis and metastatic growth in the brain.

Authors:  Mihaela Lorger; Joseph S Krueger; Melissa O'Neal; Karin Staflin; Brunhilde Felding-Habermann
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  19 in total

1.  Inter-heterogeneity and intra-heterogeneity of αvβ3 in non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer patients as revealed by 68Ga-RGD2 PET imaging.

Authors:  Fei Kang; Zhe Wang; Guoquan Li; Shengjun Wang; Daliang Liu; Mingru Zhang; Mingxuan Zhao; Weidong Yang; Jing Wang
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Imaging angiogenesis using 68Ga-NOTA-PRGD2 positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with severe intracranial atherosclerotic disease.

Authors:  Shi Shu; Li Zhang; Yi Cheng Zhu; Fang Li; Li Ying Cui; Hao Wang; Yi Sun; Pei Lin Wu; Zhao Hui Zhu; Bin Peng
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2017-03-03       Impact factor: 6.200

3.  Standard OSEM vs. regularized PET image reconstruction: qualitative and quantitative comparison using phantom data and various clinical radiopharmaceuticals.

Authors:  Judit Lantos; Erik S Mittra; Craig S Levin; Andrei Iagaru
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-04-25

Review 4.  Receptor Occupancy Imaging Studies in Oncology Drug Development.

Authors:  Ingrid J G Burvenich; Sagun Parakh; Adam C Parslow; Sze Ting Lee; Hui K Gan; Andrew M Scott
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 4.009

5.  Fast indirect fluorine-18 labeling of protein/peptide using the useful 6-fluoronicotinic acid-2,3,5,6-tetrafluorophenyl prosthetic group: A method comparable to direct fluorination.

Authors:  Falguni Basuli; Xiang Zhang; Carolyn C Woodroofe; Elaine M Jagoda; Peter L Choyke; Rolf E Swenson
Journal:  J Labelled Comp Radiopharm       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 1.921

6.  Pilot prospective evaluation of (18)F-FPPRGD2 PET/CT in patients with cervical and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Ryogo Minamimoto; Amer Karam; Mehran Jamali; Amir Barkhodari; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir; Oliver Dorigo; Andrei Iagaru
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-11-27       Impact factor: 9.236

7.  RGD PET: From Lesion Detection to Therapy Response Monitoring.

Authors:  Gang Niu; Xiaoyuan Chen
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 8.  Imaging for Target Delineation and Treatment Planning in Radiation Oncology: Current and Emerging Techniques.

Authors:  Sonja Stieb; Brigid McDonald; Mary Gronberg; Grete May Engeseth; Renjie He; Clifton David Fuller
Journal:  Hematol Oncol Clin North Am       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 3.722

9.  [(18)F]FPRGD2 PET/CT imaging of integrin αvβ3 levels in patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma.

Authors:  Nadia Withofs; Philippe Martinive; Jean Vanderick; Noëlla Bletard; Irène Scagnol; Frédéric Mievis; Fabrice Giacomelli; Philippe Coucke; Philippe Delvenne; Didier Cataldo; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Roland Hustinx
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 10.  Unconventional non-amino acidic PET radiotracers for molecular imaging in gliomas.

Authors:  Francesco Ceci; Andrei Iagaru; R Laudicella; N Quartuccio; G Argiroffi; P Alongi; L Baratto; E Califaretti; V Frantellizzi; G De Vincentis; A Del Sole; L Evangelista; S Baldari; S Bisdas
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 10.057

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.