| Literature DB >> 30671112 |
Ok-Sun Kim1,2, Jang Woo Park1, Eun Sang Lee1, Ran Ji Yoo1, Won-Il Kim2, Kyo Chul Lee3, Jae Hoon Shim1, Hye Kyung Chung1.
Abstract
O-2-18F-fluoroethyl-l-tyrosine ([18F]FET) has been widely used for glioblastomas (GBM) in clinical practice, although evaluation of its applicability in non-clinical research is still lacking. The objective of this study was to examine the value of [18F]FET for treatment evaluation and prognosis prediction of anti-angiogenic drug in an orthotopic mouse model of GBM. Human U87MG cells were implanted into nude mice and then bevacizumab, a representative anti-angiogenic drug, was administered. We monitored the effect of anti-angiogenic agents using multiple imaging modalities, including bioluminescence imaging (BLI), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT). Among these imaging methods analyzed, only [18F]FET uptake showed a statistically significant decrease in the treatment group compared to the control group (P=0.02 and P=0.03 at 5 and 20 mg/kg, respectively). This indicates that [18F]FET PET is a sensitive method to monitor the response of GBM bearing mice to anti-angiogenic drug. Moreover, [18F]FET uptake was confirmed to be a significant parameter for predicting the prognosis of anti-angiogenic drug (P=0.041 and P=0.007, on Days 7 and 12, respectively, on Pearson's correlation; P=0.048 and P=0.030, on Days 7 and 12, respectively, on Cox regression analysis). However, results of BLI or MRI were not significantly associated with survival time. In conclusion, this study suggests that [18F]FET PET imaging is a pertinent imaging modality for sensitive monitoring and accurate prediction of treatment response to anti-angiogenic agents in an orthotopic model of GBM.Entities:
Keywords: [18F]FET PET; anti-angiogenic drug; bevacizumab; glioblastoma; orthotopic model
Year: 2018 PMID: 30671112 PMCID: PMC6333614 DOI: 10.5625/lar.2018.34.4.248
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lab Anim Res ISSN: 1738-6055
Figure 1Timeline of the experimental design. The initiation date of treatment was considered as Day 0. Grey boxes indicate bevacizumab administration (one time per day). Arrows indicate imaging modalities taken.
Figure 2Monitoring response to anti-angiogenic drug in GBM bearing mice by BLI. Representative BLI images showing bevacizumab response on Days 0, 7, and 12 after initiation of treatment (A). Mice received 0, 5 or 20 mg/kg bevacizumab from 17 days after U87MG cell inoculation. Scale bar represents 107–108 photons/sec/cm2/sr. Bioluminescence signal in tumor of each group over time is shown (B). Values represent mean±SD of each group.
Figure 3Monitoring the response to anti-angiogenic drug in GBM bearing mice by MRI. Representative transverse plane of T2 weighted MRI images showing bevacizumab response on Days 0, 7, and 12 after initiation of treatment (A). Tumor volume (B) and tumor growth rate (C) of each group over time are shown. Values represent mean±SD of each group.
Figure 4Monitoring the response to anti-angiogenic drug in GBM bearing mice by [18F]FET PET imaging. Representative transverse plane of PET image showing bevacizumab response on Days 7 and 12 after initiation of treatment (A). Scale bar represents 0.5–2.0 g/mL of [18F]FET. Quantitative [18F]FET uptake in tumor of each group over time is shown (B). Values represent mean±SD of each group. *P<0.05 vs. control group determined by the Dunnett's test after ANOVA multiple comparison.
Figure 5Kaplan-Meier survival curves for control or bevacizumab treatment groups of GBM orthotopic model. *P<0.05 vs. control group determined by log-rank test.
Correlations between survival time and parameters of imaging modalities
| Parameters of imaging modalities | Ra | |
|---|---|---|
| Day 7 | ||
| Photon flux | −0.405 | 0.192 |
| Tumor volume | −0.393 | 0.207 |
| Tumor growth rate | −0.291 | 0.360 |
| SUVmax | 0.041 | |
| Day 12 | ||
| Photon flux | −0.368 | 0.239 |
| Tumor volume | −0.563 | 0.056 |
| Tumor growth rate | −0.394 | 0.205 |
| SUVmax | 0.007 |
aPearson's r.
Data highlighted in bold represent statistical significance (*P<0.05, **P<0.01).
Figure 6Dispersion charts demonstrating correlation between survival time and maximum SUV of [18F]FET on Days 7 (A) and 12 (B) in the orthotopic GBM model (n=8 and 11, respectively).
Cox proportional hazards model to identify predictors of survival time
| Parameters of imaging modalities | HRa | 95% CIb | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Day 7 | |||
| Photon flux | 0.147 | 1.000 | |
| Tumor volume | 0.158 | 1.019 | 0.993-1.047 |
| Tumor growth rate | 0.671 | 1.060 | 0.810-1.387 |
| SUVmax | 0.048 | 4.438 | 1.013-19.445 |
| Day 12 | |||
| Photon flux | 0.141 | 1.000 | |
| Tumor volume | 0.050 | 1.010 | 1.000-1.021 |
| Tumor growth rate | 0.350 | 1.020 | 0.978-1.063 |
| SUVmax | 0.030 | 4.572 | 1.155-18.096 |
aHazard ratio. bConfidence interval.
Data highlighted in bold represent statistical significance (*P<0.05).