Purpose: Among the treatment options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are antibodies against the programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway. Positron emission tomography (PET) has been successfully used to assess PD-1/PD-L1 signaling in subcutaneous tumor models, but orthotopic tumor models are increasingly being recognized as a better option to accurately recapitulate human disease. However, when PET radiotracers have high uptake in the liver and spleen, it can obscure signals from the adjacent pancreas, making visualization of the response in orthotopic pancreatic tumors technically challenging. In this study, we first investigated the impact of radioisotope chelators on the biodistribution of 64Cu-labeled anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies and compared the distribution profiles of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies. We then tested the hypothesis that co-injection of unlabeled antibodies reduces uptake of 64Cu-labeled anti-PD-L1 antibodies in the spleen and thereby permits accurate delineation of orthotopic pancreatic tumors in mice. Procedures: We established subcutaneous and orthotopic mouse models of PDAC using KRAS* murine pancreatic cancer cells with a doxycycline-inducible mutation of KRASG12D. We then (1) compared the biodistribution of 64Cu-labeled anti-PD-1 with 2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane tetraacetic acid (p-SCN-Bn-DOTA) and 2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-triacetic acid (p-SCN-Bn-NOTA) used as the chelators in the orthotopic model; (2) compared the biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 in the orthotopic model; and (3) imaged subcutaneous and orthotopic KRAS* tumors with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 with and without co-injection of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 as the blocking agent. Results: [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was a promising imaging probe. By co-injection of an excess of unlabeled anti-PD-L1, background signals of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 from the spleen were significantly reduced, leading to a clear delineation of orthotopic pancreatic tumors. Conclusions: Co-injection with unlabeled anti-PD-L1 is a useful method for PET imaging of PD-L1 expression in orthotopic pancreatic cancer models.
Purpose: Among the treatment options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are antibodies against the programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway. Positron emission tomography (PET) has been successfully used to assess PD-1/PD-L1 signaling in subcutaneous tumor models, but orthotopic tumor models are increasingly being recognized as a better option to accurately recapitulate human disease. However, when PET radiotracers have high uptake in the liver and spleen, it can obscure signals from the adjacent pancreas, making visualization of the response in orthotopic pancreatic tumors technically challenging. In this study, we first investigated the impact of radioisotope chelators on the biodistribution of 64Cu-labeled anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies and compared the distribution profiles of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies. We then tested the hypothesis that co-injection of unlabeled antibodies reduces uptake of 64Cu-labeled anti-PD-L1 antibodies in the spleen and thereby permits accurate delineation of orthotopic pancreatic tumors in mice. Procedures: We established subcutaneous and orthotopic mouse models of PDAC using KRAS* murinepancreatic cancer cells with a doxycycline-inducible mutation of KRASG12D. We then (1) compared the biodistribution of 64Cu-labeled anti-PD-1 with 2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane tetraacetic acid (p-SCN-Bn-DOTA) and 2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-triacetic acid (p-SCN-Bn-NOTA) used as the chelators in the orthotopic model; (2) compared the biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 in the orthotopic model; and (3) imaged subcutaneous and orthotopic KRAS* tumors with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 with and without co-injection of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 as the blocking agent. Results: [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was a promising imaging probe. By co-injection of an excess of unlabeled anti-PD-L1, background signals of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 from the spleen were significantly reduced, leading to a clear delineation of orthotopic pancreatic tumors. Conclusions: Co-injection with unlabeled anti-PD-L1 is a useful method for PET imaging of PD-L1 expression in orthotopic pancreatic cancer models.
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
(PDAC) is a lethal disease with
a 5 year overall survival rate below 7%.[1] Owing to the difficulty of early detection, many patients with PDAC
are present with locally advanced or metastatic disease that cannot
be surgically resected. These patients are commonly treated with conventional
chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, but outcomes remain abysmal despite
vigorous research efforts.[2]Blockade
of the programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1)/programmed
cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway, by either anti-PD-1 antibodies
or anti-PD-L1 antibodies, is a highly promising therapy that has elicited
durable antitumor responses in a variety of tumor types, including
melanoma and nonsmall cell lung cancer.[3] However, antibodies against the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway have limited
success in PDAC in the clinic, possibly due to the co-existence of
multiple factors including an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment,
low tumor immunogenicity, and scarcity of tumor-infiltrating cytotoxic
T cells. In preclinical studies, various efforts have been made to
overcome resistance to anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 antibodies by combining
these agents with other treatment modalities such as vaccines, chemotherapy,
radiation therapy, and local tumor ablation techniques.[4,5] These studies establish that combination therapy can reverse resistance
to immunotherapy in PDAC. The PD-1/PD-L1 pathway mediates self-tolerance
and immune suppression.[6] While PD-1 is
absent on resting T cells, PD-1 is expressed on activated T cells[7] and on exhausted T cells during chronic infection.[8] PD-1-expressing, tumor-infiltrating CD8 T cells
are often impaired in terms of antitumor functions.[9] PD-L1 is endogenously expressed on tumor cells, tumor-associated
antigen-presenting cells, and fibroblasts.[6,10] Immunotherapy-induced
cytokines, especially interferon-γ derived from cytotoxic T
cells,[11] can also increase PD-L1 expression
in the tumor microenvironment,[12] which
leads to adaptive resistance of tumors to immune checkpoint blockade
therapy.[13] Therefore, molecular imaging
of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway not only can help identifying the proper
patient populations for immunotherapies but also can provide a valuable
tool to monitor tumor response to combination therapies with anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1
antibodies.Molecular nuclear imaging is a powerful tool to
noninvasively and
quantitatively assess the pharmacokinetics of antibodies and the expression
of cell surface markers.[14] [64Cu]Cu2+ cations have been conjugated to an ectodomain
of PD-1 protein with high binding affinity to PD-L1 but much smaller
size (14 KDa) than antibody (150 KDa) for imaging PD-L1 expression
on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes via positron emission tomography
(PET).[15]89Zr (t1/2 = 78.4 h)-labeled pembrolizumab, a U.S. Food and Drug
Administration-approved antihuman PD-1 antibody, successfully imaged
lymphocyte infiltration of salivary and lacrimal glands in humanized
mouse models at 72–168 h after radiotracer injection.[16] Although 89Zr-labeled antibodies
in general yield an excellent tumor-to-background ratio due to clearance
of radiotracers from normal organs at delayed times (72–168
h post-injection), the long half-life of 89Zr raises concern
over increased radiation exposure and potential radiotoxicity. 125I-labeled nivolumab, another U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved
antihuman PD-1 antibody, was used to image PD-1 expression via single-photon
emission computed tomography in a colon cancer xenograft model.[17] However, PD-1-targeted imaging does not directly
visualize the primary tumor; rather, it visualizes the trafficking
of PD-1-expressing immune cells. In contrast, PD-L1-targeted imaging
visualizes tumor cells and other stromal cells. PD-L1-targeted imaging
has been realized using radiolabeled whole antibodies[11,18] and antibody fragments.[19] In addition
to the use of ectodomain of PD-1,[15] attempts
using peptides that are smaller than antibodies for imaging PD-L1
expression have also been reported.[20,21] These radiotracers
displayed lower liver uptake but higher kidney uptake than antibodies.Most preclinical imaging studies to date for PD-1 and PD-L1 expression
were performed in subcutaneous xenograft mouse models, in which the
tumors were inoculated away from the organs of the reticuloendothelial
system, including the liver and spleen.[11,17,18] However, subcutaneous models are increasingly recognized
as inferior to orthotopic models for recapitulating cancer biology
because the composition of the tumor-associated microenvironment dramatically
differs between subcutaneous and orthotopic xenografts.[22] The use of orthotopic models of PDAC can be
extremely challenging because of the proximity of orthotopic pancreatic
tumors to both liver and spleen, which can specifically or nonspecifically
entrap radiolabeled antibodies. In particular, the spleen was reported
to be a significant site of uptake for radiolabeled anti-PD-L1 antibodies.[23] In a recent clinical study, PET imaging using 89Zr-labeled nivolumab (anti-PD-1) revealed substantial signals
from the liver and spleen even at 7 days after injection of imaging
tracers.[24] Vento et al.[25] reported a PET study with 89Zr-labeled atezolizumab
(anti-PD-L1) in a patient-derived xenograft model of renal cell carcinoma
in OD/SCIDmice. The tumors were clearly visualized because they were
inoculated at a site away from the liver and spleen.Recently,
co-injection of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 antibodies was found
to enhance the delivery of radiolabeled anti-PD-L1 antibodies to subcutaneously
inoculated melanoma xenografts.[26,27] In the current study,
we first investigated the impact of radioisotope chelators on the
biodistribution of 64Cu-labeled antibodies and compared
the distribution profiles of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1. We then tested
the hypothesis that co-injection of unlabeled antibodies reduces the
uptake of 64Cu-labeled anti-PD-L1 antibodies in the spleen
and thereby permits enhanced delineation of orthotopic PDAC.
Results
and Discussion
Radiolabeling and Characterization
The radiochemical
yields for all 64Cu-labeled antibodies were 60–70%
on the basis of instant thin-layer chromatography (ITLC) analysis.
Radiolabeling of DOTA-anti-PD-1 (Figure a) yielded greater than 95% radiochemical
purity after purification through a PD-10 column (Figure b). Similarly, radiolabeling
of NOTA-anti-PD-1 and NOTA-anti-PD-L1 yielded greater than 95% radiochemical
purity after PD-1 column purification (Supporting Information, Figure S1). The mean specific activity values
for [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1 and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1
were 0.85 ± 0.06 MBq/μg (∼128 MBq/nmol) and 0.50
± 0.04 MBq/μg (∼75 MBq/nmol), respectively. The
mean specific activity for [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was
0.50 ± 0.14 MBq/μg (∼75 MBq/nmol). The specific
activity of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-IgG corresponding to anti-PD-1
was 0.57 MBq/μg (86 MBq/nmol); the specific activity of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-IgG corresponding to anti-PD-1 was 0.68 MBq/μg
(102 MBq/nmol).
Figure 1
Radiolabeling and biodistribution of 64Cu-labeled
anti-PD-1
via DOTA and NOTA chelators. (a) Chemical illustration of antibodies
radiolabeled via DOTA (top) and NOTA (bottom). (b) Representative
instant thin-layer chromatography curves of [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1
before and after PD-10 purification. (c) Biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1 (n = 3) and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 (n = 8) in mice bearing orthotopic
KRAS* tumors at 24 h after injections is presented as mean ±
standard error of the mean (SEM). The significance of differences
was determined using the two-sided Student’s t-test. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01;
***p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001,
n.s., not significant.
Radiolabeling and biodistribution of 64Cu-labeled
anti-PD-1
via DOTA and NOTA chelators. (a) Chemical illustration of antibodies
radiolabeled via DOTA (top) and NOTA (bottom). (b) Representative
instant thin-layer chromatography curves of [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1
before and after PD-10 purification. (c) Biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1 (n = 3) and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 (n = 8) in mice bearing orthotopic
KRAS* tumors at 24 h after injections is presented as mean ±
standard error of the mean (SEM). The significance of differences
was determined using the two-sided Student’s t-test. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01;
***p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001,
n.s., not significant.We further characterized
the binding affinity of NOTA-anti-PD-L1
to PD-L1 using the surface plasmon resonance (SPR) technique. Our
data show that intact anti-PD-L1 and NOTA-anti-PD-L1 bound to PD-L1
with essentially the same binding affinities, with KD1 of ∼25 nM and KD2 of ∼624 nM when sensorgram curves were fitted to a bivalent
binding model (Supporting Information, Figure S2). On the basis of mass spectrometry data, each anti-PD-L1
contained an average of ∼3 NOTA molecules (Supporting Information, Figure S3).
Impact of Chelators on
Biodistribution of Anti-PD-1
In mice bearing orthotopic KRAS*
tumors, 24 h after antibody injection,
most [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1 was entrapped in the liver
(29.6 ± 2.9% ID/g) and spleen (11.3 ± 2.6% ID/g) and the
uptake of [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1 in the tumor was only
0.3 ± 0.1% ID/g (Figure c). In contrast, at the same time point, significantly less
[64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 was entrapped in the liver (5.4
± 0.3% ID/g) and spleen (6.3 ± 0.6% ID/g) than [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1, and there was a significantly greater uptake
of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 than that of [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1
in the tumor (5.5 ± 0.2% ID/g), blood (9.3 ± 0.7% ID/g),
and lymph node (8.1 ± 0.8% ID/g) (Figure c). These data suggested that considerable
trans-chelation of 64Cu2+ occurred with [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-labeled antibodies in the liver and spleen, in
agreement with findings by other researchers.[28,29] Therefore, NOTA was used for antibody radiolabeling in further studies.
It is interesting to note that the radioactivity in the intestine
did not increase in mice injected with [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1
compared to that in mice injection with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1,
as is usually the case for a hepatobiliary excretion of the copper
compounds after a trans-chelation. It is possible that liver metabolism
and the excretion rate of [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1 were
delayed. Further studies including biodistribution studies at different
time points after radiotracer injection are needed to see whether
hepatobiliary excretion would occur at later time points.
Biodistribution
of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
We then quantified the biodistribution
of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
along with their respective isotype IgG controls in mice bearing orthotopic
KRAS* tumors. Twenty four hours after radiotracer injection, the distribution
pattern of anti-PD-1 was indistinguishable from that of its IgG control
(Figure a). In contrast,
at the same time point, most anti-PD-L1 had disappeared from the blood
circulation and redistributed into other organs (Figure b). The uptake of anti-PD-L1
in blood was less than 5% that of IgG control, while the uptake of
anti-PD-L1 in the liver, spleen, lung, intestine, and mesenteric lymph
nodes was significantly higher than that of IgG control (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the tumor uptake
of anti-PD-L1 and its IgG control (p > 0.05).
However,
the tumor-to-blood ratio of anti-PD-L1 was over 40 times higher than
the tumor-to-blood ratio of anti-PD-1 or the two IgG controls (Figure c). These results
indicated that [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 is suitable for
PET imaging of PD-L1 expression in mice.
Figure 2
Biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1.
Shown are (a) tissue uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1
(n = 8) and its IgG
control (n = 4), (b) tissue uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 (n = 8) and its IgG control
(n = 4), and (c) tumor-to-blood ratios. Biodistribution
was performed in an orthotopic KRAS* tumor model. Tissues were collected
24 h after antibody injection. Data are presented as mean ± SEM.
The significance of differences was determined using a two-sided Student’s t-test or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed
by post hoc Tukey’s multicomparison test. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, n.s. not significant.
Biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1.
Shown are (a) tissue uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1
(n = 8) and its IgG
control (n = 4), (b) tissue uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 (n = 8) and its IgG control
(n = 4), and (c) tumor-to-blood ratios. Biodistribution
was performed in an orthotopic KRAS* tumor model. Tissues were collected
24 h after antibody injection. Data are presented as mean ± SEM.
The significance of differences was determined using a two-sided Student’s t-test or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed
by post hoc Tukey’s multicomparison test. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, n.s. not significant.
MicroPET/CT Imaging of Subcutaneous Tumors
with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
We then performed
a proof-of-concept
imaging study in the subcutaneous KRAS* model. As shown in Figure a, left panel, microPET/CT
with [64Cu]Cu -NOTA-anti-PD-L1 alone showed strong signals
from the tumor, liver, spleen, lymph nodes, and brown adipose tissue.
Others have also reported uptake of PD-L1-targeting radiotracers in
the brown adipose tissue.[30] When 17-fold
excess of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 was co-injected, however, there was
a dramatic decrease in the signal intensity in the spleen, lymph node,
and brown adipose tissue (Figure a, right panel). Consistent with the image-based analysis,
the ex vivo biodistribution study performed immediately after imaging
showed that blocking with unlabeled antibodies increased uptake of
[64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 by 13 times in blood and reduced
its uptake in the spleen by 60% (p < 0.0001) (Figure b). There was no
significant change in liver uptake of the radiotracer with or without
blocking. Blocking doubled the uptake of [64Cu]Cu–-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 in the tumor (p < 0.001). Immunohistochemical
staining showed a high expression of PD-L1 in the spleen and tumor
and moderate expression in the liver (Figure c). These data suggested that co-injection
of unlabeled antibodies prevented entrapment of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
in the spleen and prolonged its blood retention, thereby leading to
the accumulation of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 in the KRAS*
tumors.
Figure 3
Effect of blocking on microPET/CT imaging of subcutaneous KRAS*
tumors with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1. [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
(200 μCi, 15 μg) was intravenously injected alone or with
unlabeled anti-PD-L1 (250 μg). MicroPET/CT images were acquired
24 h after antibody injection. (a) Representative maximum intensity
projection of the microPET/CT image with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
without or with unlabeled anti-PD-L1 as the blocking antibody. Organs
of interest are indicated with white arrows. BAT, brown adipose tissue;
LN, lymph node. (b) Biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
without and with unlabeled antibodies in imaged mice. Four mice were
included in each group. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. The
significance of differences was determined using a two-sided Student’s t-test (n = 5/group). ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001. (c) Representative
photographs of immunohistochemical staining of PD-L1 expression in
the mouse spleen, liver, and tumor. Brown staining indicates PD-L1+ pixels. Scale bars = 50 μm.
Effect of blocking on microPET/CT imaging of subcutaneous KRAS*
tumors with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1. [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
(200 μCi, 15 μg) was intravenously injected alone or with
unlabeled anti-PD-L1 (250 μg). MicroPET/CT images were acquired
24 h after antibody injection. (a) Representative maximum intensity
projection of the microPET/CT image with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
without or with unlabeled anti-PD-L1 as the blocking antibody. Organs
of interest are indicated with white arrows. BAT, brown adipose tissue;
LN, lymph node. (b) Biodistribution of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
without and with unlabeled antibodies in imaged mice. Four mice were
included in each group. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. The
significance of differences was determined using a two-sided Student’s t-test (n = 5/group). ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001. (c) Representative
photographs of immunohistochemical staining of PD-L1 expression in
the mouse spleen, liver, and tumor. Brown staining indicates PD-L1+ pixels. Scale bars = 50 μm.
MicroPET/CT Imaging of Orthotopic Tumors with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
We then performed microPET/CT imaging
of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 along with different ratios
of unlabeled antibodies in the orthotopic KRAS* model (Figure ). With both 15- and 50-fold
excesses of unlabeled antibodies, the spleen uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was substantially reduced, allowing clear delineation
of orthotopic KRAS* tumors in axial and coronal images (Figure a). The biodistribution study
performed immediately after the PET imaging confirmed that mice co-injected
with unlabeled anti-PD-L1 had significantly more [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
in the blood and significantly less [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
in the spleen, kidney, lung, and brown adipose tissue (Figure b). Compared to injection of
[64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 alone, co-injection of a 15-fold
excess of unlabeled antibodies increased the tumor uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 by 68% (p < 0.05).
There was a significantly lower tumor uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
in mice co-injected with a 50-fold excess of unlabeled anti-PD-L1
than in mice co-injected with a 15-fold excess of unlabeled anti-PD-L1,
suggesting that the tumor uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
was partially blocked at higher doses of the cold antibody.
Figure 4
Effect of the
blocking ratio on microPET/CT imaging of orthotopic
KRAS* tumors with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1. [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was intravenously injected alone or with unlabeled
anti-PD-L1 24 h prior to PET imaging. (a) Representative axial and
coronal maximum intensity projection of microPET/CT images of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 alone or with a 15- and 50-fold excess
of unlabeled anti-PD-L1. The spleen is indicated by the white solid
arrow. Tumors are circled by yellow dashed circles. (b) Biodistribution
of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 by the ex vivo cut-and-count
method. BAT, brown adipose tissue. Three–four mice were included
in each group. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. The significance
of differences was determined using one-way ANOVA (n = 4/group). *p < 0.05, **p <
0.01, ***p < 0.001, n.s. not significant.
Effect of the
blocking ratio on microPET/CT imaging of orthotopic
KRAS* tumors with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1. [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was intravenously injected alone or with unlabeled
anti-PD-L1 24 h prior to PET imaging. (a) Representative axial and
coronal maximum intensity projection of microPET/CT images of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 alone or with a 15- and 50-fold excess
of unlabeled anti-PD-L1. The spleen is indicated by the white solid
arrow. Tumors are circled by yellow dashed circles. (b) Biodistribution
of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 by the ex vivo cut-and-count
method. BAT, brown adipose tissue. Three–four mice were included
in each group. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. The significance
of differences was determined using one-way ANOVA (n = 4/group). *p < 0.05, **p <
0.01, ***p < 0.001, n.s. not significant.We further verified these findings by postmortem
imaging of the
mice with orthotopic KRAS* tumors with dissected tumors and the spleen
(Figure ). When only
[64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was injected, the spleen exhibited
the strongest PET signals, which completely masked the signals from
orthotopic KRAS* tumors on live animal imaging (Figure a). In the presence of unlabeled antibodies,
however, the multinodule KRAS* tumor was successfully delineated from
the background. Postmortem imaging confirmed that the tumor nodules
exhibited stronger signals than the spleen and liver did (Figure a). Autoradiography
(Figure b) further
confirmed increased tumor deposition of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
in mice co-injected with cold anti-PD-L1. Imaging-based quantification
showed that with co-injection of unlabeled anti-PD-L1, the tissue
uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 in the tumor was 2.7
times what it was without blocking. And uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
in the heart was 1.8 times what it was without blocking because blocking
prolonged the blood retention of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1.
Co-injection of cold anti-PD-L1 decreased the uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 in the spleen and BAT by about 60% (Figure c).
Figure 5
Effect of blocking on
microPET/CT imaging of orthotopic KRAS* tumors
with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1. [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
(13 μg, 150 μCi) was intravenously injected alone (n = 3) or with 200 μg of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 24 h
prior to PET imaging (n = 5). (a) Representative
microPET images of live mice and dead mice with dissected tumors and
the spleen following injection of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
alone (left panel) or with unlabeled anti-PD-L1 (right panel), along
with corresponding photographs of dead mice. (b) Corresponding autoradiographs
and H&E-stained 20 μm thick tumor sections. (c) Quantification
of tissue uptake based on PET imaging. Bl, bladder; H, heart; Li,
liver; Sp, spleen; Tu, tumor (circles); and BAT, brown adipose tissue.
Three mice were included in each group. Data are presented as mean
± SEM. The significance of differences was determined using two-sided
Student’s t-test. *p <
0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
Effect of blocking on
microPET/CT imaging of orthotopic KRAS* tumors
with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1. [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
(13 μg, 150 μCi) was intravenously injected alone (n = 3) or with 200 μg of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 24 h
prior to PET imaging (n = 5). (a) Representative
microPET images of live mice and dead mice with dissected tumors and
the spleen following injection of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
alone (left panel) or with unlabeled anti-PD-L1 (right panel), along
with corresponding photographs of dead mice. (b) Corresponding autoradiographs
and H&E-stained 20 μm thick tumor sections. (c) Quantification
of tissue uptake based on PET imaging. Bl, bladder; H, heart; Li,
liver; Sp, spleen; Tu, tumor (circles); and BAT, brown adipose tissue.
Three mice were included in each group. Data are presented as mean
± SEM. The significance of differences was determined using two-sided
Student’s t-test. *p <
0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.In this study, we first established that antibodies
radiolabeled
with 64Cu via the NOTA chelator had lower background signals
in organs of the reticuloendothelial system and therefore are better
imaging candidates than antibodies 64Cu-labeled via the
DOTA chelator. We also found that whereas [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1
had long circulating time in the blood, [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
was cleared from the blood and effectively accumulated in the spleen
and KRAS* tumors with a tumor-to-blood ratio above 15. Co-injection
of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 significantly increased blood retention of
[64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 and reduced its uptake in the
spleen, thereby permitting satisfactory imaging of orthotopic KRAS*
tumors.Both DOTA and NOTA are widely used in radiometal labeling
of antibodies.[31,32] DOTA is a preferred chelator
for 68Ga and 90Y labeling.[20,33] However, [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-labeled
antibodies have shown higher uptake in normal tissues, including the
liver and spleen, than [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-labeled antibodies.
Both [64Cu]Cu-DOTA and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA have similar
kinetic inertness,[34] although [64Cu]Cu-NOTA exhibits better in vivo stability than [64Cu]Cu-DOTA.[35−37] Our findings are consistent with previous reports that the [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-antibody had 5 times more liver uptake than the
[64Cu]Cu-NOTA-antibody.[38] As
a result, [64Cu]Cu-DOTA-anti-PD-1 had a low tumor uptake
because only a small fraction of the injected tracer was available
for tumor accumulation. Lower abundance of PD-1 than PD-L1 may also
have contributed to a lower tumor uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1
compared to [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1. Radiotracers with
higher specific activity and injected at a lower dose than the dose
used in the current study may improve tumor detectability with anti-PD-1.[39,40]The tumor-to-blood, tumor-to-liver, and tumor-to-spleen ratios
at 24 h after [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-1 injection were only
0.86 ± 0.4, 1.47 ± 0.09, and 1.30 ± 0.08, respectively,
and therefore rendered PET tumor imaging is impossible with this radiotracer.
In contrast, blocking increased the tumor-to-liver ratio of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 from 2.5 ± 0.6 to 3.3 ± 0.2
and the tumor-to-spleen ratio from 0.8 ± 0.2 to 4.3 ± 0.4
in the subcutaneous KRAS* model (Supporting Information, Table S1). Moreover, blocking with a 15 times
molar excess of cold anti-PD-L1 increased the tumor-to-liver ratio
of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 from 1.4 ± 0.2 to 2.5
± 0.3 and the tumor-to-spleen ratio from 0.5 ± 0.1 to 2.5
± 0.1 in the orthotopic KRAS* model (Supporting Information, Table S2). Under such conditions, even though
blocking reduced tumor-to-blood ratios from 19 ± 3 to 2.9 ±
0.2, the decreased tumor-to-blood ratio was more than compensated
for by the increased tumor-to-liver and tumor-to-spleen ratios, resulting
in significantly improved tumor detectability. Our data support the
idea that the spleen acts as a “reservoir” or “sink”
for anti-PD-L1. The positive staining of PD-L1 in the mouse spleen
(Figure c) can be
attributed to the presence of PD-L1-positive B cells, splenic dendritic
cells, and macrophages.[26] Blocking with
unlabeled anti-PD-L1 increased the uptake of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
in the blood by 13 times and allowed accumulation of the radiolabeled
antibodies in KRAS* tumors (Figure b). Our data suggest that the preferencial uptake in
the spleen decreased the availability of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
for uptake in the tumor, raising the possibility that blocking this
sink effect with unlabeled antibodies makes the radiotracer available
to tumors. Indeed, co-injection of 15-fold of unlabeled antibodies
with [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 allowed improved visualization
of the orthotopic KRAS* tumors compared to images acquired without
blocking (Figure ).
Increasing the ratio of cold anti-PD-L1 to [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1
by 50 did not further reduce background radioactivity but reduced
the tumor uptake of the radiotracer compared to that observed at a
15:1 ratio. Thus, a molar ratio of 15–20 between cold anti-PD-L1
and [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 appears to yield optimal imaging
properties in mice. The total dose of anti-PD-L1 (∼10 mg/kg)
aligned well with that used in humanpatients. Therefore, our results
indicate that the same strategy may lead to satisfactory imaging of
PDAC in patients.
Conclusions
Molecular imaging of
the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is critical to provide
a personalized plan for immune checkpoint blockade therapy. We have
demonstrated that the biodistribution of radiolabeled anti-PD-1 and
anti-PD-L1 antibodies depends on the selection of radioisotope chelators,
and we have established that radiolabeled anti-PD-L1 is more suitable
than radiolabeled anti-PD-1 for PET imaging 24 h after injection.
Co-injection of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 prevents entrapment of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-anti-PD-L1 in the spleen and permits high-quality
imaging of orthotopic pancreatic tumors. Our method provides a useful
tool that can be readily translated into the clinic for imaging PD-L1
expression in PDAC and for treatment optimization and response monitoring.
Experimental
Section
Chemicals and Reagents
Antimouse PD-L1 (clone 10F.9G2)
and its isotype rat IgG2b (clone LTF-2) and antimouse PD-1 (CD279,
clone J43) and its isotype polyclonal Armenian hamster IgG were obtained
from Bio X Cell (West Lebanon, NH). Bifunctional chelators 2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane
tetraacetic acid (p-SCN-Bn-DOTA) and 2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-triacetic
acid (p-SCN-Bn-NOTA) were obtained from Macrocyclics
(Plano, TX). PD-10 columns were purchased from GE Healthcare (Pittsburgh,
PA). [64Cu]CuCl2 (specific activity, 21.42 Ci/μmol)
was obtained from the Cyclotron Radiochemistry Facility at The University
of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX).
Cell Line and
Animal Models
All animal studies were
approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and were
carried out in accordance with institutional guidelines. KRAS* murinepancreatic cancer cells with a doxycycline-inducible mutation of KRASG12D were cultured and maintained as described in previous
publications.[41] The orthotopic KRAS* murinePDAC model was established by injecting KRAS* cells into the pancreas
head of 8-week-old female C57BL/6 mice (Taconic Biosciences, Rensselaer,
NY). Briefly, the mouse was anesthetized with isoflurane (2% in O2), and a small incision was made at the left side of the abdomen
to expose the spleen and pancreas. Then, 5 × 105 KRAS*
cells in 10 μL of a one-to-one mixture of Hanks’s balanced
salt solution (HBSS) and Matrigel with reduced growth factors (Corning
Inc., Corning, NY) were injected into the pancreas head using a 27-gauge
needle. Ten seconds after the injection was completed, the needle
was gently pulled out. The spleen and pancreas were placed back into
the abdominal cavity, and the incision was closed with absorbable
suture and clips. The subcutaneous KRAS* model was established by
subcutaneous injection of 1 × 106 KRAS* cells in 100
μL of HBSS at the right hind flank of C57BL/6 mice. The tumors
were monitored by palpation and allowed to grow to about 6 mm in diameter
before imaging studies.
Radiolabeling
Anti-PD-1 (1 nmol)
was incubated with p-SCN-Bn-DOTA (20 nmol) in phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS)
containing 50 μM sodium bicarbonate (pH 8.5) at 4 °C for
4 h. Unreacted p-SCN-Bn-DOTA was removed by passing
the mixture through a PD-10 column using PBS as the eluent. The same
procedures were used for the synthesis of NOTA-anti-PD-1, NOTA-anti-PD-L1,
and NOTA-IgG controls. The PD-L1 binding affinity of purified NOTA-anti-PD-L1
was compared to that of the intact anti-PD-L1 using the surface plasmon
resonance (SPR) technique. The number of NOTA molecules conjugated
to each anti-PD-L1 in NOTA-anti-PD-L1 was characterized by liquid
chromatography–mass spectrometry. Details for the SPR and mass
spectrometry methods are provided in the Supporting Information.For radiolabeling, each DOTA- or NOTA-conjugated
antibody was incubated with [64Cu]CuCl2 in 0.1
M sodium acetate (pH = 5) at 38 °C for 45 min. Free [64Cu]Cu2+ cations were removed by passing the mixture through
a PD-10 column eluted with PBS. Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA,
4 mM final concentration) was added to the reaction solution to scavenge
excess 64Cu2+ ions before PD-10 purification.
The radiochemical purity of the resultant radiotracers was measured
using instant thin-layer chromatography.
Biodistribution and Autoradiography
64Cu-labeled
antibodies were intravenously injected into KRAS*-bearing mice (3–8
mice per group) through the tail vein at a dose of 5–15 μg
per mouse, corresponding to the radioactivity of 1.1–3.7 MBq
(30–100 μCi) per mouse. Mice were euthanized 24 h after
antibody injection. Radioactivity in the blood, tumor, and major organs
was measured on a γ counter (Packard Cobra II, Perkin Elmer,
Sugar Land, TX) and normalized to the weight of each organ. The whole-body
distribution of antibodies was calculated as the percentage of injected
dose per gram of the tissue (% ID/g) and expressed as mean ±
standard error of the mean (SEM).For autoradiography, tumors
were frozen in OCT blocks and cryosectioned into 10 μm slices,
which were then exposed to a Fuji image plate (BAS-SR 2025) for 24
h. The image plates were then scanned on a multifunctional imaging
system (Fuji Film FLA5100, Life Science, Valhalla, NY).
MicroPET/CT
Imaging
64Cu-labeled anti-PD-L1
was dispersed in PBS and intravenously injected into KRAS*-bearing
mice (3–5 mice per group) through the tail vein, at a dose
of 15 μg/mouse, corresponding to the radioactivity of 5.5 MBq
(150 μCi) per mouse. For blocking studies, 250 or 750 μg
of unlabeled anti-PD-L1 was co-injected with the 64Cu-labeled
anti-PD-L1. Twenty four hours after antibody injection, the mice were
anesthetized with isoflurane (2% in O2) and placed in a
Bruker Albira PET/SPECT/CT scanner (Billerica, MA) in a prone position.
The system had a field of view of 80 mm and a resolution of up to
1.3 mm for PET and 90 μm for CT along all three axes. MicroPET/CT
images were acquired over a period of 15 min. For data analysis, the
regions-of-interest (ROIs) were manually drawn to record the mean
radioactivity and convert the values to units in KBq/cc. The results
were then converted to % ID/cc. The microPET images were reconstructed
using the three-dimensional maximum likelihood and ordered-subset
expectation maximization algorithms. The CT images were obtained using
a three-dimension-based, filtered back-projection algorithm. The fusion
of PET and CT images was performed using PMOD base Functionality software
version 4.0 (PMOD Technologies LLC, Zurich, Switzerland).
Statistical
Analysis
Data were presented as mean ±
SEM. The significance of differences was determined with two-tailed
Student’s t-test or one-way analysis of variance
(ANOVA) followed by post hoc Tukey’s test, using GraphPad Prism
software 7 (La Jolla, CA).
Authors: Sarah R Verhoeff; Michel M van den Heuvel; Carla M L van Herpen; Berber Piet; Erik H J G Aarntzen; Sandra Heskamp Journal: PET Clin Date: 2019-10-29
Authors: Daniel L Barber; E John Wherry; David Masopust; Baogong Zhu; James P Allison; Arlene H Sharpe; Gordon J Freeman; Rafi Ahmed Journal: Nature Date: 2005-12-28 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Mojgan Ahmadzadeh; Laura A Johnson; Bianca Heemskerk; John R Wunderlich; Mark E Dudley; Donald E White; Steven A Rosenberg Journal: Blood Date: 2009-05-07 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Anders Josefsson; Jessie R Nedrow; Sunju Park; Sangeeta Ray Banerjee; Andrew Rittenbach; Fabien Jammes; Benjamin Tsui; George Sgouros Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2015-11-10 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Anna Moroz; Chia-Yin Lee; Yung-Hua Wang; Jeffrey C Hsiao; Natalia Sevillano; Charles Truillet; Charles S Craik; Lawrence Fong; Cheng-I Wang; Michael J Evans Journal: Bioconjug Chem Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 4.774
Authors: Jessica R Ingram; Michael Dougan; Mohammad Rashidian; Marko Knoll; Edmund J Keliher; Sarah Garrett; Scott Garforth; Olga S Blomberg; Camilo Espinosa; Atul Bhan; Steven C Almo; Ralph Weissleder; Harvey Lodish; Stephanie K Dougan; Hidde L Ploegh Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Fiona Hegi-Johnson; Stacey Rudd; Rodney J Hicks; Dirk De Ruysscher; Joseph A Trapani; Thomas John; Paul Donnelly; Benjamin Blyth; Gerard Hanna; Sarah Everitt; Peter Roselt; Michael P MacManus Journal: NPJ Precis Oncol Date: 2022-04-07