Douglas A Collins1. 1. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. collins.douglas@mayo.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To image the uptake of cobalamin (Cbl) within malignant breast tumors in vivo. PROCEDURES: Prior to surgery 20 female patients with clinically suspected breast tumors were intravenously administered 0.25 μg of an In-111 labeled 5-deoxyadenosylcobalamin (AC) analog ([111In]AC) and sequentially imaged with whole-body planar (WBP) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) between 2-5 h and 20-24 h post-injection (P.I.). The tumor to background (T/B) ratio for [111In]AC in breast tumors at 2-5 h was correlated to its expression of estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR), and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) receptors. Subsequent pulse chase (PC) experiments in nude mice burdened with the MDA-MB-231 triple-negative (TN) breast tumor xenograft measured the effect that pulses of AC or dexamethasone (DEX) had on [111In]AC uptake in both normal murine tissue and the TN breast tumor. RESULTS: The mean [111In]AC T/B ratio of the patients' 18 resected tumors was 5.8. Comparing ER- and PR-positive tumors (n = 11) to TN and HER2-positive tumors (n = 7), the mean [111In]AC T/B ratios at 2-5 h P.I. were 3.2 (range 1.8-5.6) and 10.4 (range 3.3-22.5), respectively. Pulses of 2.0 μg of AC at 2, 8, or 24 h; or 40.0 μg of DEX at 24 h prior to injecting 0.5 μg of [111In]AC, increased mean tracer uptake in the MDA-MB-231 tumors by 26.4, 71.5, 92.6, and 49.1 %, respectively. Only the 2- and 24-h PC intervals concomitantly suppressed [111In]AC uptake in normal murine tissue while enhancing [111In]AC uptake in MDA-MB-231 tumors. CONCLUSION: The uptake of Cbl within malignant breast tumors can be imaged clinically. Cbl uptake is greatest in TN and HER2-positive breast tumors. A solitary bolus of AC or DEX increases the [111In]AC uptake within a breast tumor in vivo. Investigating the cytogenetic mechanisms controlling the endocytosis of Cbl in malignant breast tumors is warranted.
PURPOSE: To image the uptake of cobalamin (Cbl) within malignant breast tumors in vivo. PROCEDURES: Prior to surgery 20 female patients with clinically suspected breast tumors were intravenously administered 0.25 μg of an In-111 labeled 5-deoxyadenosylcobalamin (AC) analog ([111In]AC) and sequentially imaged with whole-body planar (WBP) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) between 2-5 h and 20-24 h post-injection (P.I.). The tumor to background (T/B) ratio for [111In]AC in breast tumors at 2-5 h was correlated to its expression of estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR), and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) receptors. Subsequent pulse chase (PC) experiments in nude mice burdened with the MDA-MB-231 triple-negative (TN) breast tumor xenograft measured the effect that pulses of AC or dexamethasone (DEX) had on [111In]AC uptake in both normal murine tissue and the TN breast tumor. RESULTS: The mean [111In]AC T/B ratio of the patients' 18 resected tumors was 5.8. Comparing ER- and PR-positive tumors (n = 11) to TN and HER2-positive tumors (n = 7), the mean [111In]AC T/B ratios at 2-5 h P.I. were 3.2 (range 1.8-5.6) and 10.4 (range 3.3-22.5), respectively. Pulses of 2.0 μg of AC at 2, 8, or 24 h; or 40.0 μg of DEX at 24 h prior to injecting 0.5 μg of [111In]AC, increased mean tracer uptake in the MDA-MB-231 tumors by 26.4, 71.5, 92.6, and 49.1 %, respectively. Only the 2- and 24-h PC intervals concomitantly suppressed [111In]AC uptake in normal murine tissue while enhancing [111In]AC uptake in MDA-MB-231 tumors. CONCLUSION: The uptake of Cbl within malignant breast tumors can be imaged clinically. Cbl uptake is greatest in TN and HER2-positive breast tumors. A solitary bolus of AC or DEX increases the [111In]AC uptake within a breast tumor in vivo. Investigating the cytogenetic mechanisms controlling the endocytosis of Cbl in malignant breast tumors is warranted.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Cobalamin metabolism; Genes; Receptor imaging; Transport proteins
Authors: Sylvia K Plevritis; Diego Munoz; Allison W Kurian; Natasha K Stout; Oguzhan Alagoz; Aimee M Near; Sandra J Lee; Jeroen J van den Broek; Xuelin Huang; Clyde B Schechter; Brian L Sprague; Juhee Song; Harry J de Koning; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Ronald Gangnon; Young Chandler; Yisheng Li; Cong Xu; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Hui Huang; Donald A Berry; Jeanne S Mandelblatt Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-01-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Deborah J Rhodes; Michael K O'Connor; Stephen W Phillips; Robin L Smith; Douglas A Collins Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Marina Riggio; María C Perrone; María L Polo; María J Rodriguez; María May; Martín Abba; Claudia Lanari; Virginia Novaro Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jose M Jimenez-Guardeño; Ana Maria Ortega-Prieto; Borja Menendez Moreno; Thomas J A Maguire; Adam Richardson; Juan Ignacio Diaz-Hernandez; Javier Diez Perez; Mark Zuckerman; Albert Mercadal Playa; Carlos Cordero Deline; Michael H Malim; Rocio Teresa Martinez-Nunez Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2022-07-18 Impact factor: 4.779