Meltem Ocak1, Wissam Beaino1, Alexander White1, Dexing Zeng1,2, Zhengxin Cai1, Carolyn J Anderson1,2,3,4. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. 2 Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 3. 3 Department of Pharmacology and Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 4. 4 Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this research was to evaluate c(RGDyK) conjugated to phosphonate-based cross-bridged chelators using Cu-free click chemistry in the 4T1 mouse mammary tumor bone metastasis model in comparison with 64Cu-CB-TE2A-c(RGDyK), which previously showed selective binding to integrin αvβ3 on osteoclasts. EXPERIMENTAL: Two phosphonate-based cross-bridged chelators (CB-TE1A1P and CB-TE1K1P) were conjugated to c(RGDyK) through bio-orthogonal strain-promoted alkyne-azide cycloaddition. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the 64Cu-labeled TE1A1P-DBCO-c(RGDyK) (AP-c(RGDyK)), TE1K1P-PEG4-DBCO-c(RGDyK) (KP-c(RGDyK)), and CB-TE2A-c(RGDyK) were compared in the 4T1 mouse model of bone metastasis. The affinities of the unconjugated and chelator-c(RGDyK) analogs for αvβ3 integrin were determined using a competitive-binding assay. For in vivo evaluation, BALB/c mice were injected with 1 × 105 4T1/Luc cells in the left ventricle. Formation of metastases was monitored by bioluminescence imaging (BLI) followed by small-animal PET/CT 2 h postinjection of radiotracers. RESULTS: The chelator-peptide conjugates showed similar affinity to integrin αvβ3, in the low nM range. PET imaging demonstrated a higher uptake in bones having metastases for all 64Cu-labeled c(RGDyK) analogs compared with bones in nontumor-bearing mice. The correlation between uptake of 64Cu-AP-c(RGDyK) and 64Cu-KP-c(RGDyK) in bones with metastases based on PET/CT imaging, and osteoclast number based on histomorphometry, was improved over the previously investigated 64Cu-CB-TE2A-c(RGDyK). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the phosphonate chelator conjugates of c(RDGyK) peptides are promising PET tracers suitable for imaging tumor-associated osteoclasts in bone metastases.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this research was to evaluate c(RGDyK) conjugated to phosphonate-based cross-bridged chelators using Cu-free click chemistry in the 4T1 mouse mammary tumor bone metastasis model in comparison with 64Cu-CB-TE2A-c(RGDyK), which previously showed selective binding to integrin αvβ3 on osteoclasts. EXPERIMENTAL: Two phosphonate-based cross-bridged chelators (CB-TE1A1P and CB-TE1K1P) were conjugated to c(RGDyK) through bio-orthogonal strain-promoted alkyne-azide cycloaddition. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the 64Cu-labeled TE1A1P-DBCO-c(RGDyK) (AP-c(RGDyK)), TE1K1P-PEG4-DBCO-c(RGDyK) (KP-c(RGDyK)), and CB-TE2A-c(RGDyK) were compared in the 4T1 mouse model of bone metastasis. The affinities of the unconjugated and chelator-c(RGDyK) analogs for αvβ3 integrin were determined using a competitive-binding assay. For in vivo evaluation, BALB/c mice were injected with 1 × 105 4T1/Luc cells in the left ventricle. Formation of metastases was monitored by bioluminescence imaging (BLI) followed by small-animal PET/CT 2 h postinjection of radiotracers. RESULTS: The chelator-peptide conjugates showed similar affinity to integrin αvβ3, in the low nM range. PET imaging demonstrated a higher uptake in bones having metastases for all 64Cu-labeled c(RGDyK) analogs compared with bones in nontumor-bearing mice. The correlation between uptake of 64Cu-AP-c(RGDyK) and 64Cu-KP-c(RGDyK) in bones with metastases based on PET/CT imaging, and osteoclast number based on histomorphometry, was improved over the previously investigated 64Cu-CB-TE2A-c(RGDyK). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the phosphonate chelator conjugates of c(RDGyK) peptides are promising PET tracers suitable for imaging tumor-associated osteoclasts in bone metastases.
Authors: Nadia Withofs; Edith Charlier; Paolo Simoni; Victoria Alvarez-Miezentseva; Frédéric Mievis; Fabrice Giacomelli; Christine Mella; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Olivier Malaise; Dominique de Seny; Michel Malaise; Roland Hustinx Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 2.668
Authors: R Haubner; H J Wester; U Reuning; R Senekowitsch-Schmidtke; B Diefenbach; H Kessler; G Stöcklin; M Schwaiger Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Alexander Zheleznyak; Thaddeus J Wadas; Christopher D Sherman; Jessica M Wilson; Paul J Kostenuik; Katherine N Weilbaecher; Carolyn J Anderson Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: I Nakamura; M F Pilkington; P T Lakkakorpi; L Lipfert; S M Sims; S J Dixon; G A Rodan; L T Duong Journal: J Cell Sci Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Jun Young Lee; Jung Ho Chae; Min Goo Hur; Seung Dae Yang; Young Bae Kong; Jongchul Lee; Jin Sik Ju; Pyeong Seok Choi; Jeong Hoon Park Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-05-18
Authors: Subrata K Pore; Eun-Ryeong Hahm; Su-Hyeong Kim; Krishna B Singh; Lea Nyiranshuti; Joseph D Latoche; Carolyn J Anderson; Juraj Adamik; Deborah L Galson; Kurt R Weiss; Rebecca J Watters; Boeun Lee; Prashant N Kumta; Shivendra V Singh Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2019-11-29 Impact factor: 6.261