Raag D Airan1, Catherine A Foss1, Nicholas P K Ellens1, Yuchuan Wang1, Ronnie C Mease1, Keyvan Farahani1,2, Martin G Pomper3. 1. The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 3. The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA. mpomper@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A wide variety of hydrophilic imaging and therapeutic agents are unable to gain access to the central nervous system (CNS) due to the blood-brain barrier (BBB). In particular, unless a particular transporter exists that may transport the agent across the BBB, most agents that are larger than 500 Da or that are hydrophilic will be excluded by the BBB. Glutamate carboxypeptidase II (GCPII), also known as the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) in the periphery, has been implicated in various neuropsychiatric conditions. As all agents that target GCPII are hydrophilic and thereby excluded from the CNS, we used GCPII as a platform for demonstrating our MR-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) technique for delivery of GCPII/PSMA-specific imaging agents to the brain. PROCEDURES: Female rats underwent MRgFUS-mediated opening of the BBB. After opening of the BBB, either a radio- or fluorescently labeled ureido-based ligand for GCPII/PSMA was administered intravenously. Brain uptake was assessed for 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid ([18F]DCFPyL) and YC-27, two compounds known to bind GCPII/PSMA with high affinity, using positron emission tomography (PET) and near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging, respectively. Specificity of ligand binding to GCPII/PSMA in the brain was determined with co-administration of a molar excess of ZJ-43, a compound of the same chemical class but different structure from either [18F]DCFPyL or YC-27, which competes for GCPII/PSMA binding. RESULTS: Dynamic PET imaging using [18F]DCFPyL demonstrated that target uptake reached a plateau by ∼1 h after radiotracer administration, with target/background ratios continuing to increase throughout the course of imaging, from a ratio of ∼4:1 at 45 min to ∼7:1 by 80 min. NIRF imaging likewise demonstrated delivery of YC-27 to the brain, with clear visualization of tracer in the brain at 24 h. Tissue uptake of both ligands was greatly diminished by ZJ-43 co-administration, establishing specificity of binding of each to GCPII/PSMA. On gross and histological examination, animals showed no evidence for hemorrhage or other deleterious consequences of MRgFUS. CONCLUSIONS: MRgFUS provided safe opening of the BBB to enable specific delivery of two hydrophilic agents to target tissues within the brain. This platform might facilitate imaging and therapy using a variety of agents that have heretofore been excluded from the CNS.
PURPOSE: A wide variety of hydrophilic imaging and therapeutic agents are unable to gain access to the central nervous system (CNS) due to the blood-brain barrier (BBB). In particular, unless a particular transporter exists that may transport the agent across the BBB, most agents that are larger than 500 Da or that are hydrophilic will be excluded by the BBB. Glutamate carboxypeptidase II (GCPII), also known as the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) in the periphery, has been implicated in various neuropsychiatric conditions. As all agents that target GCPII are hydrophilic and thereby excluded from the CNS, we used GCPII as a platform for demonstrating our MR-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) technique for delivery of GCPII/PSMA-specific imaging agents to the brain. PROCEDURES: Female rats underwent MRgFUS-mediated opening of the BBB. After opening of the BBB, either a radio- or fluorescently labeled ureido-based ligand for GCPII/PSMA was administered intravenously. Brain uptake was assessed for 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid ([18F]DCFPyL) and YC-27, two compounds known to bind GCPII/PSMA with high affinity, using positron emission tomography (PET) and near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging, respectively. Specificity of ligand binding to GCPII/PSMA in the brain was determined with co-administration of a molar excess of ZJ-43, a compound of the same chemical class but different structure from either [18F]DCFPyL or YC-27, which competes for GCPII/PSMA binding. RESULTS: Dynamic PET imaging using [18F]DCFPyL demonstrated that target uptake reached a plateau by ∼1 h after radiotracer administration, with target/background ratios continuing to increase throughout the course of imaging, from a ratio of ∼4:1 at 45 min to ∼7:1 by 80 min. NIRF imaging likewise demonstrated delivery of YC-27 to the brain, with clear visualization of tracer in the brain at 24 h. Tissue uptake of both ligands was greatly diminished by ZJ-43 co-administration, establishing specificity of binding of each to GCPII/PSMA. On gross and histological examination, animals showed no evidence for hemorrhage or other deleterious consequences of MRgFUS. CONCLUSIONS: MRgFUS provided safe opening of the BBB to enable specific delivery of two hydrophilic agents to target tissues within the brain. This platform might facilitate imaging and therapy using a variety of agents that have heretofore been excluded from the CNS.
Authors: Ying Chen; Mrudula Pullambhatla; Catherine A Foss; Youngjoo Byun; Sridhar Nimmagadda; Srinivasan Senthamizhchelvan; George Sgouros; Ronnie C Mease; Martin G Pomper Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-10-31 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Zsolt Szabo; Esther Mena; Steven P Rowe; Donika Plyku; Rosa Nidal; Mario A Eisenberger; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Hong Fan; Robert F Dannals; Ying Chen; Ronnie C Mease; Melin Vranesic; Akrita Bhatnagar; George Sgouros; Steve Y Cho; Martin G Pomper Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: M Jacobson; R Levkovitz; A Ben-Tal; K Thielemans; T Spinks; D Belluzzo; E Pagani; V Bettinardi; M C Gilardi; A Zverovich; G Mitra Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: P Sácha; J Zámecník; C Barinka; K Hlouchová; A Vícha; P Mlcochová; I Hilgert; T Eckschlager; J Konvalinka Journal: Neuroscience Date: 2006-12-05 Impact factor: 3.590
Authors: Lee Mullin; Ryan Gessner; James Kwan; Mehmet Kaya; Mark A Borden; Paul A Dayton Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging Date: 2011-01-19 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Manabu Kinoshita; Nathan McDannold; Ferenc A Jolesz; Kullervo Hynynen Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-07-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Elizabeth Nance; Kelsie Timbie; G Wilson Miller; Ji Song; Cameron Louttit; Alexander L Klibanov; Ting-Yu Shih; Ganesh Swaminathan; Rafael J Tamargo; Graeme F Woodworth; Justin Hanes; Richard J Price Journal: J Control Release Date: 2014-06-28 Impact factor: 9.776
Authors: Brittany M Stopa; James Crowley; Csaba Juhász; Cara M Rogers; Mark R Witcher; Jackson W Kiser Journal: Mol Imaging Date: 2022-04-15 Impact factor: 3.250