| Literature DB >> 29160082 |
Dominik Summer1, Javad Garousi2, Maryam Oroujeni2, Bogdan Mitran3, Ken G Andersson4, Anzhelika Vorobyeva2, John Löfblom4, Anna Orlova3, Vladimir Tolmachev2, Clemens Decristoforo1.
Abstract
Zirconium-89 is an emerging radionuclide for positron emission tomography (PET) especially for biomolecules with slow pharmacokinetics as due to its longer half-life, in comparison to fluorine-18 and gallium-68, imaging at late time points is feasible. Desferrioxamine B (DFO), a linear bifunctional chelator (BFC) is mostly used for this radionuclide so far but shows limitations regarding stability. Our group recently reported on fusarinine C (FSC) with similar zirconium-89 complexing properties but potentially higher stability related to its cyclic structure. This study was designed to compare FSC and DFO head-to-head as bifunctional chelators for 89Zr-radiolabeled EGFR-targeting ZEGFR:2377 affibody bioconjugates. FSC-ZEGFR: 2377 and DFO-ZEGFR:2377 were evaluated regarding radiolabeling, in vitro stability, specificity, cell uptake, receptor affinity, biodistribution, and microPET-CT imaging. Both conjugates were efficiently labeled with zirconium-89 at room temperature but radiochemical yields increased substantially at elevated temperature, 85 °C. Both 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 revealed remarkable specificity, affinity and slow cell-line dependent internalization. Radiolabeling at 85 °C showed comparable results in A431 tumor xenografted mice with minor differences regarding blood clearance, tumor and liver uptake. In comparison 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377, radiolabeled at room temperature, showed a significant difference regarding tumor-to-organ ratios. MicroPET-CT imaging studies of 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 as well as 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 confirmed these findings. In summary we were able to show that FSC is a suitable alternative to DFO for radiolabeling of biomolecules with zirconium-89. Furthermore, our findings indicate that 89Zr-radiolabeling of DFO conjugates at higher temperature reduces off-chelate binding leading to significantly improved tumor-to-organ ratios and therefore enhancing image contrast.Entities:
Keywords: DFO; EGFR; FSC; PET; affibody; zirconium-89
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29160082 PMCID: PMC5751887 DOI: 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.7b00787
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Pharm ISSN: 1543-8384 Impact factor: 4.939
Figure 1Structures of maleimide-derivatized FSC (A) and DFO (B).
Radiolabeling of FSC-ZEGFR:2377 and DFO-ZEGFR:2377 with Zirconium-89 (2.4 nmol, pH 7 at 28 °C and 85°C)a
| radiochemical
yield (RCY %) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FSC-ZEGFR:2377 | DFO-ZEGFR:2377 | |||
| time [min] | 28 °C | 85 °C | 28 °C | 85 °C |
| 10 | 33.7 ± 10.9 | 83.6 ± 7.9** | 37.9 ± 20.6 | 96.5 ± 3.0* |
| 30 | 63.2 ± 11.6 | 96.8 ± 1.8** | 50.2 ± 16.3 | 97.5 ± 1.4* |
| 45 | n.d | n.d | 62.3 ± 14.4 | 98.2 ± 1.0* |
| 60 | 82.7 ± 10.3 | 97.7 ± 0.1 | 74.4 ± 9.9 | 98.5 ± 0.6* |
| 90 | 88.1 ± 7.4 | 98.6 ± 1.0 | 81.8 ± 0.2 | n.d |
| 120 | 91.9 ± 5.8 | n.d | 83.1 ± 2.6 | n.d |
Data were calculated from ITLC measurement of the nonpurified bioconjugates and are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 4), statistical analysis was performed using the Student’s t test with P values indicating very significant (** P < 0.01) and significant (* P < 0.05) difference between various temperature.
Stability of 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 in PBS and EDTAa
| 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 | 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28 °C | 85 °C | 28 °C | 85 °C | |||||
| time [h] | PBS | EDTA | PBS | EDTA | PBS | EDTA | PBS | EDTA |
| 1 | 96.8 ± 0.1 | 94.6 ± 0.3 | 99.9 ± 0.1 | 98.9 ± 0.2 | 99.3 ± 0.2 | 95.9 ± 0.7 | 96.9 ± 0.6 | 94.3 ± 0.3 |
| 2 | 96.5 ± 0.5 | 93.5 ± 0.5 | 99.9 ± 0.1 | 99.0 ± 0.2 | 90.7 ± 4.5 | 81.7 ± 1.5 | 89.8 ± 1.3 | 84.2 ± 1.5 |
| 24 | 90.2 ± 0.1 | 85.7 ± 0.4 | 98.8 ± 0.3 | 97.6 ± 0.3 | 88.3 ± 1.3 | 67.7 ± 3.6 | 85.8 ± 0.4 | 63.3 ± 0.1 |
Data were calculated from ITLC measurement and are presented as average ± maximum error (n = 2).
Figure 2LigandTracer sensorgram and InteractionMap of 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (A) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (B) binding to EGFR-expressing A431 cells. Binding was measured at three different concentrations (0.33, 1, and 3 nM).
Figure 3(A) Receptor specificity studies on A431 and MDA468 cells for 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 [data expressed as % of total added activity; mean ± SD; n = 3]; (B) extended specificity study for 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 on cells with different level of EGFR-expression [data presented as counts per minute (CPM) per 105 cells, mean ± SD; n = 3 ]. Error bars might not be seen because they are smaller than the symbols.
Figure 4Cellular processing of 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (A) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (B) by continuous incubation on A431 and MDA468 cells (mean ± SD; n = 3). Data are presented as percentage of total radioactivity and error bars might not be seen because they are smaller than the symbols.
Figure 5Specificity of 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 in A431 tumor xenograft bearing BALB/C nu/nu 3 h after injection. Blocking was conducted by EGFR saturation with cetuximab 1 day before the experiment and showed significantly reduced uptake (P < 5.5 × 10–5). Data are presented as a mean ± SD; n = 4. Error bars might not be seen because they are smaller than the symbols.
Biodistribution of 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 in EGFR-Expressing A431 Tumor Xenografted Female BALB/C nu/nu Mice Expressed as Percentage of Injected Dose per Gram Tissue (% ID/g; Mean ± SD; n = 4)a
| 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (radiolabeling at 85 °C) | 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (radiolabeling at 85 °C) | 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (radiolabeling
at RT)[ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| organs | 3 h | 24 h | 3 h | 24 h | 3 h | 24 h |
| blood | 1.02 ± 0.29§ | 0.31 ± 0.08+,§ | 0.57 ± 0.1*,# | 0.25 ± 0.07+,# | 2.0 ± 0.38 | 0.7 ± 0.07+ |
| salivary gland | 1.18 ± 0.15 | 1.08 ± 0.19 | 0.82 ± 0.11* | 0.68 ± 0.18* | 0.99 ± 0.25 | 0.75 ± 0.06§ |
| lung | 1.43 ± 0.06 | 0.88 ± 0.1+ | 0.83 ± 0.09*,# | 0.6 ± 0.09*,# | 1.6 ± 0.14 | 0.98 ± 0.24+ |
| liver | 6.71 ± 1.38 | 5.71 ± 0.94 | 3.05 ± 0.18*,# | 2.37 ± 0.24+,* | 4.13 ± 0.86§ | 2.7 ± 0.18+,§ |
| spleen | 1.51 ± 0.23 | 1.38 ± 0.14 | 0.9 ± 0.13* | 0.96 ± 0.13* | 0.8 ± 0.12§ | 0.86 ± 0.19§ |
| colon | 1.32 ± 0.09 | 1.19 ± 0.2 | 1.12 ± 0.2 | 0.81 ± 0.12* | 1.15 ± 0.32 | 0.89 ± 0.23 |
| kidney | 291.04 ± 19.8 | 251.54 ± 23.87 | 283.5 ± 19.01 | 305.78 ± 63.6 | 239.05 ± 17.21 | 232.27 ± 10.56 |
| tumor | 8.42 ± 1.53*,§ | 5.25 ± 0.83+,*,§ | 5.9 ± 0.48# | 3.31 ± 0.57+ | 4.25 ± 0.63 | 2.58 ± 0.47+ |
| muscle | 0.30 ± 0.04 | 0.24 ± 0.03+ | 0.21 ± 0.02*,# | 0.18 ± 0.02*,# | 0.31 ± 0.02 | 0.25 ± 0.03+ |
| bone | 1.00 ± 0.09 | 0.99 ± 0.26 | 0.54 ± 0.23# | 1.0 ± 0.31 | 0.94 ± 0.16 | 1.77 ± 0.61+ |
Statistical analysis was performed using the Student’s t test with P values indicating significant (P < 0.05) difference (+) between 3 and 24 h, (*) between 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C), (§) between 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (RT) and (#) between 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (RT) at corresponding time points.
Tumor-to-Organ Ratios of 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 in BALB/C Nude Mice Bearing EGFR-Expressing A431 Tumor Xenograft (Mean ± SD; n = 4)a
| 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (radiolabeling at 85 °C) | 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (radiolabeling at 85 °C) | 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (radiolabeling
at RT)[ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| organs | 3 h | 24 h | 3 h | 24 h | 3 h | 24 h |
| blood | 9.0 ± 3.3§ | 17.5 ± 5.6§ | 10.6 ± 2.4# | 13.7 ± 2.0# | 2.2 ± 0.3 | 3.7 ± 0.6 |
| salivary gland | 7.3 ± 2.1§ | 5.0 ± 1.6 | 7.3 ± 1.7# | 5.1 ± 1.6 | 4.4 ± 0.8 | 3.2 ± 0.5 |
| lung | 5.9 ± 1.3§ | 6.0 ± 1.2§ | 7.2 ± 1.3# | 5.7 ± 1.4# | 2.7 ± 0.5 | 2.7 ± 0.4 |
| liver | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 1.9 ± 0.3*,# | 1.4 ± 0.3*,# | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.1 |
| spleen | 5.6 ± 1.2 | 3.8 ± 0.4 | 6.6 ± 0.6# | 3.5 ± 0.8 | 5.3 ± 0.4 | 3.2 ± 1.0 |
| colon | 6.4 ± 1.3§ | 4.5 ± 1.2 | 5.4 ± 1.1 | 4.2 ± 1.2 | 3.9 ± 0.9 | 3.1 ± 1.2 |
| kidney | 0.03 ± 0.006 | 0.02 ± 0.00 | 0.02 ± 0.003 | 0.01 ± 0.00 | 0.02 ± 0.003 | 0.01 ± 0.00 |
| muscle | 27.9 ± 4.9§ | 21.9 ± 2.2§ | 28.4 ± 4.7# | 18.6 ± 3.2# | 13.6 ± 1.3 | 10.3 ± 1.2 |
| bone | 8.5 ± 1.8§ | 5.6 ± 1.8§ | 9.3 ± 2.6# | 3.6 ± 1.3# | 4.6 ± 0.4 | 1.6 ± 0.1 |
Statistical analysis was performed using the Student’s t test with P values indicating significant (P < 0.05) difference (*) between 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C), (§) between 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (RT) and (#) between 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (85 °C) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (RT) at corresponding time points.
Figure 6Imaging of EGFR-expression in A431 tumor xenografted BALB/C nu/nu mice using high temperature radiolabeled 89Zr-FSC-ZEGFR:2377 (A) and 89Zr-DFO-ZEGFR:2377 (B) at 3 and 24 h post injection (Li = liver; Ki = kidneys; and Tu = tumor). Coronal/sagittal PET-CT images are shown as maximum intensity projections (MIP) in RGB color scale.