89Zr immuno-PET continues to be assessed in numerous clinical trials. This report evaluates the use of 89Zr-chloride in the radiolabeling of monoclonal antibodies conjugated with desferrioxamine B (DFO), describes its effects on radiopharmaceutical reactivity toward antigen, and offers guidance on how to ensure long-term stability and purity. Methods: 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab and 89Zr-DFO-cetuximab were prepared using 89ZrCl4 The stability of each was evaluated for 7 d in 20 mM histidine/240 mM sucrose buffer, 0.25 M sodium acetate (NaOAc) buffer containing 5 mg·mL-1 n-acetyl-l-cysteine (NAC), or 0.25 M NaOAc containing 5 mg·mL-1 l-methionine (L-MET). To assess antigen reactivity, 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab was evaluated using the Lindmo method and tested in PET/CT imaging of mouse models of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive or -negative lung cancer. Results: Using 89ZrCl4, 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab and 89Zr-DFO-cetuximab were prepared with increased specific activity and retained purities of 95% after 3 d when formulated in NaOAc buffer containing L-MET. Based on Lindmo analysis and small-animal PET/CT imaging, 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab remained reactive toward antigen after being prepared with 89ZrCl4 Conclusion: 89ZrCl4 facilitated the radiosynthesis of 89Zr immuno-PET agents with increased specific activity. L-MET enhanced long-term solution stability better than all other formulations examined, and 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab remained reactive toward antigen. Although further evaluation is necessary, these initial results suggest that 89ZrCl4 may be useful in immuno-PET radiochemistry as radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies are increasingly integrated into precision medicine strategies.
89Zr immuno-PET continues to be assessed in numerous clinical trials. This report evaluates the use of 89Zr-chloride in the radiolabeling of monoclonal antibodies conjugated with desferrioxamine B (DFO), describes its effects on radiopharmaceutical reactivity toward antigen, and offers guidance on how to ensure long-term stability and purity. Methods:89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab and 89Zr-DFO-cetuximab were prepared using 89ZrCl4 The stability of each was evaluated for 7 d in 20 mM histidine/240 mM sucrose buffer, 0.25 M sodium acetate (NaOAc) buffer containing 5 mg·mL-1 n-acetyl-l-cysteine (NAC), or 0.25 M NaOAc containing 5 mg·mL-1 l-methionine (L-MET). To assess antigen reactivity, 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab was evaluated using the Lindmo method and tested in PET/CT imaging of mouse models of humanepidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive or -negative lung cancer. Results: Using 89ZrCl4, 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab and 89Zr-DFO-cetuximab were prepared with increased specific activity and retained purities of 95% after 3 d when formulated in NaOAc buffer containing L-MET. Based on Lindmo analysis and small-animal PET/CT imaging, 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab remained reactive toward antigen after being prepared with 89ZrCl4 Conclusion:89ZrCl4 facilitated the radiosynthesis of 89Zr immuno-PET agents with increased specific activity. L-MET enhanced long-term solution stability better than all other formulations examined, and 89Zr-DFO-trastuzumab remained reactive toward antigen. Although further evaluation is necessary, these initial results suggest that 89ZrCl4 may be useful in immuno-PET radiochemistry as radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies are increasingly integrated into precision medicine strategies.
Authors: Maria J W D Vosjan; Lars R Perk; Gerard W M Visser; Marianne Budde; Paul Jurek; Garry E Kiefer; Guus A M S van Dongen Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2010-03-25 Impact factor: 13.491
Authors: Hugo J W L Aerts; Ludwig Dubois; Lars Perk; Peter Vermaelen; Guus A M S van Dongen; Bradly G Wouters; Philippe Lambin Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2008-12-17 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Lars R Perk; Maria J W D Vosjan; Gerard W M Visser; Marianne Budde; Paul Jurek; Garry E Kiefer; Guus A M S van Dongen Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2009-09-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Darpan N Pandya; Kelly E Henry; Cynthia S Day; Stephen A Graves; Veronica L Nagle; Thomas R Dilling; Akesh Sinha; Brandie M Ehrmann; Nikunj B Bhatt; Yusuf Menda; Jason S Lewis; Thaddeus J Wadas Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2020-11-10 Impact factor: 5.165
Authors: Paul Lecoq; Christian Morel; John O Prior; Dimitris Visvikis; Stefan Gundacker; Etiennette Auffray; Peter Križan; Rosana Martinez Turtos; Dominique Thers; Edoardo Charbon; Joao Varela; Christophe de La Taille; Angelo Rivetti; Dominique Breton; Jean-François Pratte; Johan Nuyts; Suleman Surti; Stefaan Vandenberghe; Paul Marsden; Katia Parodi; Jose Maria Benlloch; Mathieu Benoit Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Bastiaan M Privé; Yvonne H W Derks; Florian Rosar; Gerben M Franssen; Steffie M B Peters; Fadi Khreish; Mark Bartholomä; Stephan Maus; Martin Gotthardt; Peter Laverman; Mark W Konijnenberg; Samer Ezziddin; James Nagarajah; Sandra Heskamp Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-12-21 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Marion Chomet; Maxime Schreurs; Maria J Bolijn; Mariska Verlaan; Wissam Beaino; Kari Brown; Alex J Poot; Albert D Windhorst; Herman Gill; Jan Marik; Simon Williams; Joseph Cowell; Gilles Gasser; Thomas L Mindt; Guus A M S van Dongen; Danielle J Vugts Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-09-05 Impact factor: 9.236