Christian Brand1, Valerie A Longo2, Mike Groaning3, Wolfgang A Weber4,5,6, Thomas Reiner7,8. 1. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 2. Small-Animal Imaging Core Facility, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 3. Endocyte, Inc., West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. weberw@mskcc.org. 5. Molecular Pharmacology and Chemistry Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA. weberw@mskcc.org. 6. Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, 10065, USA. weberw@mskcc.org. 7. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. reinert@mskcc.org. 8. Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, 10065, USA. reinert@mskcc.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The folate receptor (FR) has emerged as an interesting diagnostic and therapeutic drug target with many potential applications in oncologic and inflammatory disorders. It was therefore the aim of this study to develop a folate-derived Ga-68-based positron emission tomography (PET) imaging tracer that is straightforward to radiolabel and could be broadly used in clinical studies. We validated its target binding affinity and specificity and compared it to [99mTc]EC20, the folate single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging tracer that has been most extensively studied clinically so far. PROCEDURES: The new folic acid-derived PET imaging agent is linked via a polyethyleneglycol linker to the chelator 1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-trisacetic acid (NOTA). This new compound, NOTA-folate, was labeled with gallium-68. We tested the probe's stability in human plasma and its selectivity in vitro, using the FR-positive KB cell line as well as the FR-negative A549 cell line. The pharmacokinetic profile of [68Ga]NOTA-folate was evaluated in FR-positive KB mouse xenografts. Following intravenous injection of [68Ga]NOTA-folate (383 ± 53 μCi), PET/computed tomography (CT) imaging studies as well as biodistribution studies were performed using KB tumor-bearing mice (n = 3). In vitro as well as in vivo studies were performed in parallel with the SPECT imaging tracer [99mTc]EC20. RESULTS: In comparison to [99mTc]EC20 (radiochemical yield (RCY) = 82.0 ± 2.9 %, 91.8 ± 2.0 % purity), similar radiochemical yield (87.2 ± 6.9 %) and radiochemical purity (95.6 ± 1.8 %) could be achieved for [68Ga]NOTA-folate. For both tracers, we observed high affinity for FR-positive cells in vitro and high plasma stability. In PET/CT and biodistribution studies, [68Ga]NOTA-folate appeared to display slightly superior in vivo performance in comparison to [99mTc]EC20. In detail, 68Ga-NOTA-folate showed very good tumor uptake and retention (6.6 ± 1.1 %ID/g), relatively low kidney uptake (21.7 ± 1.1 %ID/g), and very low liver uptake (0.38 ± 0.08 %ID/g). In vivo blocking studies using a fivefold excess of EC20 reduced the tumor uptake to 2.5 ± 0.7 %ID/g, confirming receptor specific binding of [68Ga]NOTA-folate in vivo. CONCLUSION: We validated a new Ga-68 folate-based PET imaging agent with excellent pharmacokinetics and tumor uptake. Based on a head-to-head comparison between both tracers, [68Ga]NOTA-folate is a suitable imaging probe for the delineation of FR-positive tumors and a promising candidate for clinical translation.
PURPOSE: The folate receptor (FR) has emerged as an interesting diagnostic and therapeutic drug target with many potential applications in oncologic and inflammatory disorders. It was therefore the aim of this study to develop a folate-derived Ga-68-based positron emission tomography (PET) imaging tracer that is straightforward to radiolabel and could be broadly used in clinical studies. We validated its target binding affinity and specificity and compared it to [99mTc]EC20, the folate single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging tracer that has been most extensively studied clinically so far. PROCEDURES: The new folic acid-derived PET imaging agent is linked via a polyethyleneglycol linker to the chelator 1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-trisacetic acid (NOTA). This new compound, NOTA-folate, was labeled with gallium-68. We tested the probe's stability in human plasma and its selectivity in vitro, using the FR-positive KB cell line as well as the FR-negative A549 cell line. The pharmacokinetic profile of [68Ga]NOTA-folate was evaluated in FR-positive KB mouse xenografts. Following intravenous injection of [68Ga]NOTA-folate (383 ± 53 μCi), PET/computed tomography (CT) imaging studies as well as biodistribution studies were performed using KB tumor-bearing mice (n = 3). In vitro as well as in vivo studies were performed in parallel with the SPECT imaging tracer [99mTc]EC20. RESULTS: In comparison to [99mTc]EC20 (radiochemical yield (RCY) = 82.0 ± 2.9 %, 91.8 ± 2.0 % purity), similar radiochemical yield (87.2 ± 6.9 %) and radiochemical purity (95.6 ± 1.8 %) could be achieved for [68Ga]NOTA-folate. For both tracers, we observed high affinity for FR-positive cells in vitro and high plasma stability. In PET/CT and biodistribution studies, [68Ga]NOTA-folate appeared to display slightly superior in vivo performance in comparison to [99mTc]EC20. In detail, 68Ga-NOTA-folate showed very good tumor uptake and retention (6.6 ± 1.1 %ID/g), relatively low kidney uptake (21.7 ± 1.1 %ID/g), and very low liver uptake (0.38 ± 0.08 %ID/g). In vivo blocking studies using a fivefold excess of EC20 reduced the tumor uptake to 2.5 ± 0.7 %ID/g, confirming receptor specific binding of [68Ga]NOTA-folate in vivo. CONCLUSION: We validated a new Ga-68folate-based PET imaging agent with excellent pharmacokinetics and tumor uptake. Based on a head-to-head comparison between both tracers, [68Ga]NOTA-folate is a suitable imaging probe for the delineation of FR-positive tumors and a promising candidate for clinical translation.
Entities:
Keywords:
Folate receptor expression; PET imaging; SPECT; Small molecule
Authors: Olga Ab; Kathleen R Whiteman; Laura M Bartle; Xiuxia Sun; Rajeeva Singh; Daniel Tavares; Alyssa LaBelle; Gillian Payne; Robert J Lutz; Jan Pinkas; Victor S Goldmacher; Thomas Chittenden; John M Lambert Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Carla J Mathias; Michael R Lewis; David E Reichert; Richard Laforest; Terry L Sharp; Jason S Lewis; Zhen-Fan Yang; David J Waters; Paul W Snyder; Philip S Low; Michael J Welch; Mark A Green Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Nikki Parker; Mary Jo Turk; Elaine Westrick; Jeffrey D Lewis; Philip S Low; Christopher P Leamon Journal: Anal Biochem Date: 2005-03-15 Impact factor: 3.365
Authors: Ronald E Fisher; Barry A Siegel; Steven L Edell; Nelson M Oyesiku; David E Morgenstern; Richard A Messmann; Robert J Amato Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Kornelis S M van der Geest; Maria Sandovici; Pieter H Nienhuis; Riemer H J A Slart; Peter Heeringa; Elisabeth Brouwer; William F Jiemy Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-06
Authors: Bruna Fernandes; Paula Kopschina Feltes; Carolina Luft; Luiza Reali Nazario; Cristina Maria Moriguchi Jeckel; Ines F Antunes; Philip H Elsinga; Erik F J de Vries Journal: EJNMMI Radiopharm Chem Date: 2022-05-08
Authors: Christian Brand; Ahmad Sadique; Jacob L Houghton; Kishore Gangangari; Jose F Ponte; Jason S Lewis; Naga Vara Kishore Pillarsetty; Jason A Konner; Thomas Reiner Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2018-08-28 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Silvano Gnesin; Joachim Müller; Irene A Burger; Alexander Meisel; Marco Siano; Martin Früh; Matthias Choschzick; Cristina Müller; Roger Schibli; Simon M Ametamey; Philipp A Kaufmann; Valerie Treyer; John O Prior; Niklaus Schaefer Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2020-04-08 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Olli Moisio; Senthil Palani; Jenni Virta; Petri Elo; Heidi Liljenbäck; Tuula Tolvanen; Meeri Käkelä; Maxwell G Miner; Erika Atencio Herre; Päivi Marjamäki; Tiit Örd; Merja Heinäniemi; Minna U Kaikkonen; Fenghua Zhang; Madduri Srinivasarao; Juhani Knuuti; Philip S Low; Antti Saraste; Xiang-Guo Li; Anne Roivainen Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Cristina Martín-Sabroso; Ana Isabel Torres-Suárez; Mario Alonso-González; Ana Fernández-Carballido; Ana Isabel Fraguas-Sánchez Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2021-12-22 Impact factor: 6.321