| Literature DB >> 29938001 |
Yann Touchefeu1,2, Eric Frampas1,3, Fanny Foubert1,2, Sébastien Gouard1, Catherine Saï-Maurel1, Michel Chérel1,4, Alain Faivre-Chauvet1,5, David M Goldenberg6,7, Jacques Barbet1,8, Clément Bailly1,5, Caroline Bodet-Milin1,4,5, Thomas Carlier1,5, Françoise Kraeber-Bodéré1,4,5.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the performances pretargeted immunoPET 68Ga-PETimaging (68Ga-pPET) with anti carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) and anti-histamine-succinyl-glycine (HSG) recombinant humanized bispecific monoclonal antibody (TF2) and 68Ga-labeled HSG peptide (IMP288) to conventional 18FDG-PET in an orthotopic murine model of liver metastases of human colonic cancer.Entities:
Keywords: 18FDG-PET; carcinoembryonic antigen; colonic cancer; immuno-PET; liver metastases
Year: 2018 PMID: 29938001 PMCID: PMC6007947 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.25514
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1PET imaging of hepatic LS174T metastases (white arrows) in two mice
3D Volume Rendering. 18FDG PET-CT (a, c). Images obtained 1h after intravenous injection of 13 MBq of 18FDG. Corresponding 68Ga-pPET-CT (b, d). Images obtained 1 hour after IV injection of 10.1 MBq of pretargeted 68Ga-IMP288. Kidneys (yellow arrows), hepatic and bowel uptakes (red arrow). Corresponding macroscopic liver photography after dissection (e, f). Images c and d correspond to the mouse illustrated in Figure 1 with bioluminescence.
Figure 2PET images analysis
Comparison of uptakes obtained in 68Ga-pPET and 18FDG PET. For normal organs, values are obtained from a ROI drafted around the organ (for well- limited organs such as heart and kidney) or on the organ (for poorly-limited organs, such as liver, bowel or muscle) in each of the 2 selected images (most intense uptake). For tumors, the highest uptake in the tumor is obtained from a constant ROI of 2 mm3 drawn around the hottest spot.
Figure 3PET images analysis
Intrahepatic tumor to non-tumor ratios with 68Ga-pPET and 18FDG PET.
Figure 468Ga-pPET and 18FDG PET sensitivities, according to tumor weights
Biodistribution analyses
| Tissue | 68Ga pPET | 18FDG-PET |
|---|---|---|
| (n= 8) | (n=13) | |
| Tumor | 5.50 ± 0.96 (n=8) | 7.61 ± 1.53 (n=10) |
| Blood * | 0.63 ± 0.19 | 1.21 ± 0,20 |
| Liver ** | 0.95 ± 0.15 | 2.26 ± 0.33 |
| Kidney *** | 1.88 ± 0.37 | 6.57 ± 0.77 |
| Intestine *** | 0.30 ± 0.10 | 4.99 ± 0.52 |
| Lung *** | 0.75 ± 0.14 | 5.77 ± 0.50 |
| Muscle *** | 0.35 ± 0.14 | 5.93 ± 1.78 |
| Spleen *** | 0.47 ± 0.07 | 4.52 ± 0.37 |
| Skin *** | 0.72 ± 0.25 | 3.08 ± 0.17 |
| Brain *** | 0.15 ± 0.06 | 5.74 ± 0.49 |
| Heart *** | 0.28 ± 0.08 | 61.57 ± 10.53 |
| Bone *** | 0.32 ± 0.09 | 3.85 ± 0.40 |
| Stomach *** | 0.43 ± 0.12 | 3.43 ± 0.45 |
(*: p=0.043, **: p= 0.0018, ***: p= 0.0004).
Comparison of tumor and organ uptake in 68Ga-pPET and 18FDG-PET. (*: P=0.043, **: P=0.0018, ***: P<0.0004).
Figure 5Biodistribution analyses
Comparison of tumor/organ ratio in 68Ga-pPET and 18FDG-PET. (*: P=0.012, **: P=0.0021, ***: P<0.0005).
Figure 6Correlation between biodistribution data and PET uptake for tumors (n=18). r2 = 0.85, P<0.0001
Figure 7In-vivo bioluminescence images of a mouse bearing LS174 Luc+ liver metastases
The relative intensity of the photon counts per pixel is represented in color, from the least intense violet blue to the highest red. Tumor progression over time from day 11 to day 25.