Gina Kavanaugh1,2,3, Jason Williams1,2,3, Andrew Scott Morris2, Michael L Nickels1,2,3, Ronald Walker2,4, Norman Koglin5, Andrew W Stephens5, M Kay Washington6, Sunil K Geevarghese7, Qi Liu8,9, Dan Ayers10, Yu Shyr9,10,11, H Charles Manning12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20. 1. Vanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 2. Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 3. Vanderbilt Center for Molecular Probes, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 4. Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 5. Piramal Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany. 6. Department of Pathology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 7. Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 8. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 9. Center for Quantitative Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 10. Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 11. Department of Cancer Biology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 12. Vanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 13. Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 14. Vanderbilt Center for Molecular Probes, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 15. Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 16. Program in Chemical and Physical Biology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 17. Department of Neurosurgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 18. Vanderbilt Institute of Chemical Biology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 19. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu. 20. Department of Chemistry, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. henry.c.manning@vanderbilt.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Non-invasive imaging is central to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosis; however, conventional modalities are limited by smaller tumors and other chronic diseases that are often present in patients with HCC, such as cirrhosis. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of (4S)-4-(3-[18F]fluoropropyl)-L-glutamic acid ([18F]FSPG) positron emission tomography (PET)/X-ray computed tomography (CT) to image HCC. [18F]FSPG PET/CT was compared to standard-of-care (SOC) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and CT, and [11C]acetate PET/CT, commonly used in this setting. We report the largest cohort of HCC patients imaged to date with [18F]FSPG PET/CT and present the first comparison to [11C]acetate PET/CT and SOC imaging. This study represents the first in a US HCC population, which is distinguished by different underlying comorbidities than non-US populations. PROCEDURES: xC- transporter RNA and protein levels were evaluated in HCC and matched liver samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas (n = 16) and a tissue microarray (n = 83). Eleven HCC patients who underwent prior MRI or CT scans were imaged by [18F]FSPG PET/CT, with seven patients also imaged with [11C]acetate PET/CT. RESULTS: xC- transporter RNA and protein levels were elevated in HCC samples compared to background liver. Over 50 % of low-grade HCCs and ~70 % of high-grade tumors exceeded background liver protein expression. [18F]FSPG PET/CT demonstrated a detection rate of 75 %. [18F]FSPG PET/CT also identified an HCC devoid of typical MRI enhancement pattern. Patients scanned with [18F]FSPG and [11C]acetate PET/CT exhibited a 90 and 70 % detection rate, respectively. In dually positive tumors, [18F]FSPG accumulation consistently resulted in significantly greater tumor-to-liver background ratios compared with [11C]acetate PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: [18F]FSPG PET/CT is a promising modality for HCC imaging, and larger studies are warranted to examine [18F]FSPG PET/CT impact on diagnosis and management of HCC. [18F]FSPG PET/CT may also be useful for phenotyping HCC tumor metabolism as part of precision cancer medicine.
PURPOSE: Non-invasive imaging is central to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosis; however, conventional modalities are limited by smaller tumors and other chronic diseases that are often present in patients with HCC, such as cirrhosis. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of (4S)-4-(3-[18F]fluoropropyl)-L-glutamic acid ([18F]FSPG) positron emission tomography (PET)/X-ray computed tomography (CT) to image HCC. [18F]FSPG PET/CT was compared to standard-of-care (SOC) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and CT, and [11C]acetate PET/CT, commonly used in this setting. We report the largest cohort of HCCpatients imaged to date with [18F]FSPG PET/CT and present the first comparison to [11C]acetate PET/CT and SOC imaging. This study represents the first in a US HCC population, which is distinguished by different underlying comorbidities than non-US populations. PROCEDURES: xC- transporter RNA and protein levels were evaluated in HCC and matched liver samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas (n = 16) and a tissue microarray (n = 83). Eleven HCCpatients who underwent prior MRI or CT scans were imaged by [18F]FSPG PET/CT, with seven patients also imaged with [11C]acetate PET/CT. RESULTS: xC- transporter RNA and protein levels were elevated in HCC samples compared to background liver. Over 50 % of low-grade HCCs and ~70 % of high-grade tumors exceeded background liver protein expression. [18F]FSPG PET/CT demonstrated a detection rate of 75 %. [18F]FSPG PET/CT also identified an HCC devoid of typical MRI enhancement pattern. Patients scanned with [18F]FSPG and [11C]acetate PET/CT exhibited a 90 and 70 % detection rate, respectively. In dually positive tumors, [18F]FSPG accumulation consistently resulted in significantly greater tumor-to-liver background ratios compared with [11C]acetate PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: [18F]FSPG PET/CT is a promising modality for HCC imaging, and larger studies are warranted to examine [18F]FSPG PET/CT impact on diagnosis and management of HCC. [18F]FSPG PET/CT may also be useful for phenotyping HCC tumor metabolism as part of precision cancer medicine.
Authors: Jan Lewerenz; Sandra J Hewett; Ying Huang; Maria Lambros; Peter W Gout; Peter W Kalivas; Ann Massie; Ilse Smolders; Axel Methner; Mathias Pergande; Sylvia B Smith; Vadivel Ganapathy; Pamela Maher Journal: Antioxid Redox Signal Date: 2012-08-03 Impact factor: 8.401
Authors: Sora Baek; Andre Mueller; Young-Suk Lim; Han Chu Lee; Young-Joo Lee; Gyungyub Gong; Jae Seung Kim; Jin-Sook Ryu; Seung Jun Oh; Seung Jin Lee; Claudia Bacher-Stier; Lüder Fels; Norman Koglin; Christoph A Schatz; Ludger M Dinkelborg; Dae Hyuk Moon Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2012-12-11 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Tan To Cheung; Chi Lai Ho; Chung Mau Lo; Sirong Chen; See Ching Chan; Kenneth S H Chok; James Y Fung; Albert Chi Yan Chan; William Sharr; Thomas Yau; Ronnie T P Poon; Sheung Tat Fan Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-01-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: L H Schwartz; J Bogaerts; R Ford; L Shankar; P Therasse; S Gwyther; E A Eisenhauer Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2008-12-16 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Ilaria Grassi; Cristina Nanni; Vincenzo Allegri; Joshua James Morigi; Gian Carlo Montini; Paolo Castellucci; Stefano Fanti Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-12-15
Authors: Mirwais Wardak; Ida Sonni; Audrey P Fan; Ryogo Minamimoto; Mehran Jamali; Negin Hatami; Greg Zaharchuk; Nancy Fischbein; Seema Nagpal; Gordon Li; Norman Koglin; Mathias Berndt; Santiago Bullich; Andrew W Stephens; Ludger M Dinkelborg; Ty Abel; H Charles Manning; Jarrett Rosenberg; Frederick T Chin; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir; Erik S Mittra Journal: Radiology Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 29.146
Authors: Meaghan A Magarik; Ronald C Walker; Jill Gilbert; H Charles Manning; Pierre P Massion Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: Patrick N McCormick; Hannah E Greenwood; Matthias Glaser; Oliver D K Maddocks; Thibault Gendron; Kerstin Sander; Gayatri Gowrishankar; Aileen Hoehne; Tong Zhang; Adam J Shuhendler; David Y Lewis; Mathias Berndt; Norman Koglin; Mark F Lythgoe; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Erik Årstad; Timothy H Witney Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Hannah E Greenwood; Patrick N McCormick; Thibault Gendron; Matthias Glaser; Raul Pereira; Oliver D K Maddocks; Kerstin Sander; Tong Zhang; Norman Koglin; Mark F Lythgoe; Erik Årstad; Daniel Hochhauser; Timothy H Witney Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Allison S Cohen; Joe Grudzinski; Gary T Smith; Todd E Peterson; Jennifer G Whisenant; Tiffany L Hickman; Kristen K Ciombor; Dana Cardin; Cathy Eng; Laura W Goff; Satya Das; Robert J Coffey; Jordan D Berlin; H Charles Manning Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-04-30 Impact factor: 11.082
Authors: Allison S Cohen; Farah K Khalil; Eric A Welsh; Matthew B Schabath; Steven A Enkemann; Andrea Davis; Jun-Min Zhou; David C Boulware; Jongphil Kim; Eric B Haura; David L Morse Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-12-07
Authors: Qin Zhang; Dennis K Jeppesen; James N Higginbotham; Michelle Demory Beckler; Emily J Poulin; Alex J Walsh; Melissa C Skala; Eliot T McKinley; H Charles Manning; Matthew R Hight; Michael L Schulte; Kimberly R Watt; G Daniel Ayers; Melissa M Wolf; Gabriela Andrejeva; Jeffrey C Rathmell; Jeffrey L Franklin; Robert J Coffey Journal: Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2018-01-31