| Literature DB >> 33391488 |
Danny Feijtel1,2, Gabriela N Doeswijk1, Nicole S Verkaik2,3, Joost C Haeck1, Daniela Chicco4, Carmelina Angotti4, Mark W Konijnenberg1, Marion de Jong1, Julie Nonnekens1,2,3.
Abstract
Patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) can be treated with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). Here, the somatostatin analogue octreotate radiolabeled with lutetium-177 is targeted to NET cells by binding to the somatostatin receptor subtype 2 (SST2). During radioactive decay, DNA damage is induced, leading to NET cell death. Although the therapy proves to be effective, mortality rates remain high. To appropriately select more optimal treatment strategies, it is essential to first better understand the radiobiological responses of tumor cells to PRRT.Entities:
Keywords: DNA damage response; Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy; neuroendocrine tumors; radiobiology; somatostatin receptor subtype 2
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33391488 PMCID: PMC7738856 DOI: 10.7150/thno.51215
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1(A) SPECT/MRI scans of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injected mice at different time-points (n = 1). (B) The biodistribution measured ex vivo over time in percentage of injected dose per gram of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE in the tumor and healthy organs (n = 4). Error bars indicate standard deviation. (C) The [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE uptake tumor-to-kidney ratio over time based on the biodistribution data. Error bars indicate standard deviation. (D) The total absorbed dose of the tumor and healthy organs based on the ex vivo bio distribution data. Error bars indicate standard deviation (n = 4). (E) Comparison of the biodistribution (left Y-axis) and SPECT (right Y-axis) measurements of radioactivity in the tumor and kidney. (F) Pearson's correlation of the biodistribution measured ex vivo and SPECT measurements of accumulated radioactivity in tumors.
Figure 2Histological analysis of [ (A) Representative H&E images and zoom of NCI-H69 tumors of non-treated (NT) mice and 5 days after [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. (B) Representative TUNEL tile-scan images and zoom of NCI-H69 tumors of non-treated mice and 5 days after [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. (C) Quantification of the TUNEL signal in DAPI stained cells of 25 fields of view per tumor sample (n = 4). Error bars indicate standard error of the mean. (D) Tumor growth curves of NCI-H69 tumors after vehicle (blue) or [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (red) injection of the mice. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean (vehicle n = 9, [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE n = 8). (E) Representative images of DNA damage markers 53BP1 (red) and γH2AX (green) in NCI-H69 tumors of NT mice or 2 or 14 days after [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. (F) Quantification of 53BP1 (left panel) and γH2AX (right panel) foci in cells in 5 field of view in NCI-H69 tumors NT mice or at different time points post [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean.
Figure 3Analysis of Ki-67 status and vasculature in correlation with DNA damage levels. (A) Representative image of the Ki-67 staining of NCI-H69 tumors of non-treated mice. (B) Quantification of Ki-67-positive cells over time. ***p < 0.001 compared to NT. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean. (C) Representative tile-scan image of CD31 staining of a NT NCI-H69 tumor. (D) Representative Z-stack image with zooms of CD31 staining (red) and γH2AX staining (green) of NCI-H69 tumors two days post [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. Depicted are areas directly next to vessels (lower panel) and further from vessels (upper panel).
Figure 4Analysis of SST (A) Representative tile-scan image with zoom of SST2 stainings of NCI-H69 tumors of NT mice. (B) Representative tile-scan image with zoom of SST2 and γH2AX stainings of NCI-H69 tumors 2 days after [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. (C) γH2AX foci quantification in SST2high and SST2low regions of NT tumors and 2 days p.i. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (n = 4) *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. (D) Representative tile-scan images of SST2 stained tumors 2 and 5 days after [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. (E) Quantification of the fraction of SST2high cells in NCI-H69 tumors of NT mice or at different time points post [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE injection. Error bars indicate standard deviation. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Figure 5(A) Representative images of 53BP1 and γH2AX foci in NCI-H69 cells 1 day after [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE incubation and NT cells. (B) Quantification of the number of 53BP1 and γH2AX foci per nucleus in NCI-H69 cells in a time-dependent manner after incubation with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ****p < 0.0001. Two other independent experiments and average of all three experiments can be found in Figure S3. (C) Representative IF images of SST2 expression in NT NCI-H69 cells (upper panels) and CA20948 cells (lower panels). (D) Representative images of SST2 expression and γH2AX foci in NCI-H69 cells 2 days after incubation with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE. (E) Quantification of γH2AX foci per nucleus in SST2high and SST2low regions in NCI-H69 cells 2 days after incubation with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval. Two other independent experiments and average hereof can be found in Figure S5.
Figure 6Survival, SST (A) The relative tumor volumes in [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE treated mice bearing NCI-H69 or CA20948 tumors compared to vehicle treated controls. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean (NCI-H69 tumors: vehicle n = 9, [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE n = 8; CA20948 tumors: vehicle n = 6, [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE n = 9). (B) Survival curves of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE treated mice with NCI-H69 and CA20948 tumors belonging to mice in A. (C) Representative tile-scan images of SST2 stainings of vehicle treated NCI-H69 and CA20948 tumors and recurrent tumors. (D) Quantification of SST2high expression areas in non-treated NCI-H69 and CA20948 tumors and recurrent tumors. Error bars indicate standard error the of mean (n = 4), **p < 0.01. (F) Representative images of SST2 staining of two pancreatic NET samples with homogenous (left panel) and heterogeneous (right panel) expression. More IF stained patient samples can be found in Figure S7.