Wojciech G Lesniak1, Chengyan Chu2,3, Anna Jablonska2,3, Babak Behnam Azad2, Olivier Zwaenepoel4, Michal Zawadzki5, Ala Lisok2, Martin G Pomper2, Piotr Walczak2,3, Jan Gettemans4, Miroslaw Janowski6,7. 1. The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. wlesnia1@jhmi.edu. 2. The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Institute for Cell Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Department of Biomolecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. 5. Department of Radiology, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland. 6. The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. mjanows1@jhmi.edu. 7. Institute for Cell Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. mjanows1@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We have recently shown that intracerebral delivery of an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody bevacizumab using an intra-arterial (IA) infusion is more effective than intravenous administration. While antibodies are quickly emerging as therapeutics, their disadvantages such as large size, production logistics and immunogenicity motivate search for alternatives. Thus we have studied brain uptake of nanobodies and polyamidoamine (PAMAM) dendrimers. METHODS: Nanobodies were conjugated with deferoxamine (DFO) to generate NB(DFO)2. Generation-4 PAMAM dendrimers were conjugated with DFO, and subsequently primary amines were capped with butane-1,2-diol functionalities to generate G4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110. Resulting conjugates were radiolabeled with zirconium-89. Brain uptake of 89ZrNB(DFO)2 and 89ZrG4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110 upon carotid artery vs tail vein infusions with intact BBB or osmotic blood-brain barrier opening (OBBBO) with mannitol in mice was monitored by dynamic positron emission tomography (PET) over 30 min to assess brain uptake and clearance, followed by whole-body PET-CT (computed tomography) imaging at 1 h and 24 h post-infusion (pi). Imaging results were subsequently validated by ex-vivo biodistribution. RESULTS: Intravenous administration of 89ZrNB(DFO)2 and 89ZrG4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110 resulted in their negligible brain accumulation regardless of BBB status and timing of OBBBO. Intra-arterial (IA) administration of 89ZrNB(DFO)2 dramatically increased its brain uptake, which was further potentiated with prior OBBBO. Half of the initial brain uptake was retained after 24 h. In contrast, IA infusion of 89ZrG4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110 resulted in poor initial accumulation in the brain, with complete clearance within 1 h of administration. Ex-vivo biodistribution results reflected those on PET-CT. CONCLUSIONS: IA delivery of nanobodies might be an attractive therapeutic platform for CNS disorders where prolonged intracranial retention is necessary.
INTRODUCTION: We have recently shown that intracerebral delivery of an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody bevacizumab using an intra-arterial (IA) infusion is more effective than intravenous administration. While antibodies are quickly emerging as therapeutics, their disadvantages such as large size, production logistics and immunogenicity motivate search for alternatives. Thus we have studied brain uptake of nanobodies and polyamidoamine (PAMAM) dendrimers. METHODS: Nanobodies were conjugated with deferoxamine (DFO) to generate NB(DFO)2. Generation-4 PAMAM dendrimers were conjugated with DFO, and subsequently primary amines were capped with butane-1,2-diol functionalities to generate G4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110. Resulting conjugates were radiolabeled with zirconium-89. Brain uptake of 89ZrNB(DFO)2 and 89ZrG4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110 upon carotid artery vs tail vein infusions with intact BBB or osmotic blood-brain barrier opening (OBBBO) with mannitol in mice was monitored by dynamic positron emission tomography (PET) over 30 min to assess brain uptake and clearance, followed by whole-body PET-CT (computed tomography) imaging at 1 h and 24 h post-infusion (pi). Imaging results were subsequently validated by ex-vivo biodistribution. RESULTS: Intravenous administration of 89ZrNB(DFO)2 and 89ZrG4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110 resulted in their negligible brain accumulation regardless of BBB status and timing of OBBBO. Intra-arterial (IA) administration of 89ZrNB(DFO)2 dramatically increased its brain uptake, which was further potentiated with prior OBBBO. Half of the initial brain uptake was retained after 24 h. In contrast, IA infusion of 89ZrG4(DFO)3(Bdiol)110 resulted in poor initial accumulation in the brain, with complete clearance within 1 h of administration. Ex-vivo biodistribution results reflected those on PET-CT. CONCLUSIONS: IA delivery of nanobodies might be an attractive therapeutic platform for CNS disorders where prolonged intracranial retention is necessary.
Authors: Ganesan Vaidyanathan; Darryl McDougald; Jaeyeon Choi; Eftychia Koumarianou; Douglas Weitzel; Takuya Osada; H Kim Lyerly; Michael R Zalutsky Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Anske Van den Abbeele; Sarah De Clercq; Ariane De Ganck; Veerle De Corte; Berlinda Van Loo; Sameh Hamdy Soror; Vasundara Srinivasan; Jan Steyaert; Joël Vandekerckhove; Jan Gettemans Journal: Cell Mol Life Sci Date: 2010-02-07 Impact factor: 9.261
Authors: Peter Bannas; Alexander Lenz; Valentin Kunick; Lennart Well; William Fumey; Björn Rissiek; Friedrich Haag; Joanna Schmid; Kerstin Schütze; Anna Eichhoff; Martin Trepel; Gerhard Adam; Harald Ittrich; Friedrich Koch-Nolte Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging Date: 2015-04-27 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: John A Boockvar; Apostolos J Tsiouris; Christoph P Hofstetter; Ilhami Kovanlikaya; Sherese Fralin; Kartik Kesavabhotla; Stephen M Seedial; Susan C Pannullo; Theodore H Schwartz; Philip Stieg; Robert D Zimmerman; Jared Knopman; Ronald J Scheff; Paul Christos; Shankar Vallabhajosula; Howard A Riina Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2010-10-22 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: João R Gomes; Inês Cabrito; Hugo R Soares; Susete Costelha; Anabela Teixeira; Angela Wittelsberger; Catelijne Stortelers; Peter Vanlandschoot; Maria J Saraiva Journal: J Neurochem Date: 2018-05-09 Impact factor: 5.372