| Literature DB >> 29568374 |
Jarrod D Predina1,2, Andrew D Newton1,3, Leilei Xia1,4, Christopher Corbett1,3, Courtney Connolly1,2, Michael Shin1,2, Lydia Frezel Sulyok1,2, Leslie Litzky5, Charuhas Deshpande5, Shuming Nie6, Sumith A Kularatne7, Philip S Low7, Sunil Singhal1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical applicability of folate receptor-targeted intraoperative molecular imaging (FR-IMI) has been established for surgically resectable pulmonary adenocarcinoma. A role for FR-IMI in other lung cancer histologies has not been studied. In this study, we evaluate feasibility of FR-IMI in patients undergoing pulmonary resection for squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs).Entities:
Keywords: folate receptor; molecular imaging; squamous cell carcinoma; surgery
Year: 2018 PMID: 29568374 PMCID: PMC5862595 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24399
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Subject characteristics
| ID | Age (years) | Gender | Tumor Location | Size (cm) | Depth (cm) | SUV | Impact of IMI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 70 | F | RLL | 5.2 | 2.0 | 13.1 | 1.3 | 4.3 | |
| 2 | 87 | F | RUL | 1.0 | 0.1 | avid* | 1.6 | 1.8 | |
| 3 | 77 | F | LUL | 1.7 | 0.0 | 8.7 | 3.7 | 4.2 | |
| 4** | 60 | F | LUL | 0.9 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.9 | |
| 5 | 69 | M | RLL | 1.5 | 0.5 | 8.9 | 2.2 | 5.6 | Improved minimally invasive localization |
| 6 | 77 | M | RLL | 4.6 | 0.2 | 8 | 2.4 | 2.6 | |
| 7 | 70 | M | RUL | 4.0 | 0.0 | 18.3 | 3.8 | 3.9 | |
| 8 | 67 | M | RLL | 2.8 | 0.0 | 5.1 | 3.0 | 3.8 | |
| 9 | 78 | M | RUL | 1.1 | 1.2 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 3.5 | Improved minimally invasive localization |
| 10 | 72 | M | RUL | 3.0 | 4.0 | 4.5 | 1.0 | 3.9 | |
| 11 | 66 | M | RUL | 4.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 1.3 | 1.4 | |
| 12 | 70 | F | RUL | 1.7 | 0.9 | 3.8 | 2.1 | 2.4 | Improved minimally invasive localization |
M-Male; F-Female; RUL-Right Upper Lobe; RML-Right Middle Low; RLL-Right Lower Lobe; LUL-Left Upper Lobe; LLL-Left Lower Lobe.
* unable to quantify as records from outside our health system.
** Subject with two nodules identified preoperatively. The larger was PET avid, with suggesting SCC. The second nodule was not biopsied preoperatively and was not PET avid; however, proved to be SCC on final histopathologic analysis.
Toxicology data
| ID | Weight (kg) | OTL38 given (mg) | Adverse Event* | Time from Infusion to Imaging (hours) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 61.8 | 1.55 | 2.97 | |
| 2 | 63.5 | 1.59 | 3.38 | |
| 3 | 61.7 | 1.54 | 5.73 | |
| 4 | 79.8 | 2.00 | 4.40 | |
| 5 | 134.3 | 3.36 | 4.72 | |
| 6 | 102.1 | 2.55 | 6.5 | |
| 7 | 107 | 2.68 | 6.45 | |
| 8 | 73.5 | 1.84 | 3.68 | |
| 9 | 82.8 | 2.07 | 5.05 | |
| 10 | 103 | 2.58 | 3.15 | |
| 11 | 70.8 | 1.77 | 4.18 | |
| 12 | 88.5 | 2.21 | 2.98 |
*Adverse Events were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (Version 4.03) [33].
Figure 1Pulmonary SCCs display in situ fluorescence during FR-IMI with OTL38
Representative example: Subject 3 presented with a 1.7cm left upper lobe nodule by preoperative CT (a). Preoperative PET displayed an SUV of 8.7 (b). During FR-IMI the nodule was localized during standard thoracoscopic views (c), and displayed strong NIR signal during fluorescent imaging (d). Median fluorescent intensity (MFI) was determined for ROIs corresponding to tumor (e) and benign lung (background) (f). MFIs for ROIs were compared for SCCs (n=7) displaying in situ signal (g). Red circle-pulmonary SCC; yellow gates-ROIs measured by fluorescent analysis; ***p<0.001.
Figure 2SCCs display strong fluorescence upon ex vivo tumor bisection
Representative example: Subject 1 presented with a 5.2cm right lower lobe nodule (a) that displayed an SUV of 13.1 (b). During in situ and ex vivo analysis, no parenchymal changes were appreciated during white light evaluation (c) nor during NIR molecular imaging (d). Upon ex vivo tumor bisection, the tumor was visualized both by white light inspection (e) and by NIR molecular imaging (f). Fluorescent intensity was quantified for ROIs corresponding to the tumor (g) and benign pulmonary parenchyma (background) (h). Mean fluorescent intensities were compared for SCCs (n=9) displaying ex vivo fluorescence during back-table inspection (i). Red circle-pulmonary SCC; yellow gates-ROIs measured by fluorescent analysis; ***p<0.001.
Figure 3FRα expression patterns in SCCs as determined by immunostaining
(a) absent FRα expression, (b) 1+ FRα expression, (c) 2+ FRα expression and (d) 3+ FRα expression. 2+ and 3+ staining patterns were considered overexpression.
Figure 4OTL38 accumulation within SCC is FRα-dependent
Each resected SCC underwent microscopic fluorescent scanning and correlative molecular analysis. Representative comprehensive analysis of resected SCC (Subject 9). Whole-section images were obtained and evaluated using H&E staining, FRα IHC and a NIR microscopic scanning (top row). The tumor (gated in in dash marks) demonstrated strong fluorescence, particularly in areas of FRα expression. We noted increased fluorescence in areas of FRα overexpression (*- second row), and moderate levels in those areas with 1+ FRα staining (**-third row). Normal pulmonary parenchyma displayed negligible fluorescence (***-bottom row). * - Area of tumor with FRα overexpression (2+/3+ Staining), ** - Area of tumor with low FRα expression (1+ or absent), *** - normal lung parenchyma.
Figure 5Representative example displaying FR-IMI localization of a small SCCs
Subject 9 presented with a metabolically active 1.1cm nodule of the right upper lobe as determined by preoperative CT (a) and PET (b). Intraoperatively, the nodule could not be localized using standard visualization techniques (c); however, upon FR-IMI that nodule highly visible (d).
Variables predicting in situ fluorescence
| Characteristics of fluorescent SCCs (n=9) | Coefficient | 95% CI | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| -0.61 | -0.96 to -0.25 | ||
| 0.39 | -0.01 to 0.80 | 0.06 | |
| 0.29 | -0.08 to 0.23 | 0.29 | |
| 0.20 | -0.48 to 0.89 | 0.50 | |
| -0.15 | -1.59 to 1.28 | 0.80 | |
| 0.71 | -1.15 to 2.57 | 0.81 | |
| 0.02 | -0.18 to 0.23 | 0.81 | |
| -0.06 | -1.77 to 1.64 | 0.93 |
RUL-Right Upper Lobe; RML-Right Middle Low; RLL-Right Lower Lobe; LUL-Left Upper Lobe; LLL-Left Lower Lobe; M-Male; F-Female.