Jyoti Roy1, Margaret E White2, Falguni Basuli3, Ana Christina L Opina3, Karen Wong1, Morgan Riba2, Anita T Ton1, Xiang Zhang3, Keith H Jansson2, Elijah Edmondson4, Donna Butcher4, Frank I Lin1, Peter L Choyke1, Kathleen Kelly2, Elaine M Jagoda5. 1. Molecular Imaging Program, NCI/NIH, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B406, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. 2. Laboratory of Genitourinary Cancer Pathogenesis NCI/NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA. 3. Chemistry and Synthesis Center, NHLBI/NIH, Rockville, MD, USA. 4. Pathology/Histotechnology Laboratory, Leidos, Inc./Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, NCI, Frederick, MD, USA. 5. Molecular Imaging Program, NCI/NIH, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B406, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. ejagoda@mail.nih.gov.
Abstract
PURPOSE: PSMA overexpression has been associated with aggressive prostate cancer (PCa). However, PSMA PET imaging has revealed highly variable changes in PSMA expression in response to ADT treatment ranging from increases to moderate decreases. To better understand these PSMA responses and potential relationship to progressive PCa, the PET imaging agent, [18F]DCFPyL, was used to assess changes in PSMA expression in response to ADT using genomically characterized LuCaP patient-derived xenograft mouse models (LuCaP-PDXs) which were found to be sensitive to ADT (LuCaP73 and LuCaP136;CS) or resistant (LuCaP167;CR). METHODS: [18F]DCFPyL (2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid) was used to assess PSMA in vitro (saturation assays) in LuCaP tumor membrane homogenates and in vivo (imaging/biodistribution) in LuCaP-PDXs. Control and ADT-treated LuCaPs were imaged before ADT (0 days) and 2-, 7-, 14-, and 21-days post-ADT from which tumor:muscle ratios (T:Ms) were determined and concurrently tumor volumes were measured (caliper). After the 21-day imaging, biodistributions and histologic/genomic (PSMA, AR) analysis were done. RESULTS: [18F]DCFPyL exhibited high affinity for PSMA and distinguished different levels of PSMA in LuCaP tumors. Post-ADT CS LuCaP73 and LuCaP136 tumor volumes significantly decreased at day 7 or 14 respectively vs controls, whereas the CR LuCaP167 tumor volumes were minimally changed. [18F]DCFPyL imaging T:Ms were increased 3-5-fold in treated LuCaP73 tumors vs controls, while treated LuCaP136 T:Ms remained unchanged which was confirmed by day 21 biodistribution results. For treated LuCaP167, T:Ms were decreased (~ 45 %) vs controls but due to low T:M values (<2) may not be indicative of PSMA level changes. LuCaP73 tumor PSMA histologic/genomic results were comparable to imaging/biodistribution results, whereas the results for other tumor types varied. CONCLUSION: Tumor responses to ADT varied from sensitive to resistant among these LuCaP PDXs, while only the high PSMA expressing LuCaP model exhibited an increase in PSMA levels in response to ADT. These models may be useful in understanding the clinical relevance of PSMA PET responses to ADT and potentially the relationship to disease progression as it may relate to the genomic signature.
PURPOSE: PSMA overexpression has been associated with aggressive prostate cancer (PCa). However, PSMA PET imaging has revealed highly variable changes in PSMA expression in response to ADT treatment ranging from increases to moderate decreases. To better understand these PSMA responses and potential relationship to progressive PCa, the PET imaging agent, [18F]DCFPyL, was used to assess changes in PSMA expression in response to ADT using genomically characterized LuCaP patient-derived xenograft mouse models (LuCaP-PDXs) which were found to be sensitive to ADT (LuCaP73 and LuCaP136;CS) or resistant (LuCaP167;CR). METHODS: [18F]DCFPyL (2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid) was used to assess PSMA in vitro (saturation assays) in LuCaP tumor membrane homogenates and in vivo (imaging/biodistribution) in LuCaP-PDXs. Control and ADT-treated LuCaPs were imaged before ADT (0 days) and 2-, 7-, 14-, and 21-days post-ADT from which tumor:muscle ratios (T:Ms) were determined and concurrently tumor volumes were measured (caliper). After the 21-day imaging, biodistributions and histologic/genomic (PSMA, AR) analysis were done. RESULTS: [18F]DCFPyL exhibited high affinity for PSMA and distinguished different levels of PSMA in LuCaP tumors. Post-ADT CS LuCaP73 and LuCaP136 tumor volumes significantly decreased at day 7 or 14 respectively vs controls, whereas the CR LuCaP167 tumor volumes were minimally changed. [18F]DCFPyL imaging T:Ms were increased 3-5-fold in treated LuCaP73 tumors vs controls, while treated LuCaP136 T:Ms remained unchanged which was confirmed by day 21 biodistribution results. For treated LuCaP167, T:Ms were decreased (~ 45 %) vs controls but due to low T:M values (<2) may not be indicative of PSMA level changes. LuCaP73 tumor PSMA histologic/genomic results were comparable to imaging/biodistribution results, whereas the results for other tumor types varied. CONCLUSION: Tumor responses to ADT varied from sensitive to resistant among these LuCaP PDXs, while only the high PSMA expressing LuCaP model exhibited an increase in PSMA levels in response to ADT. These models may be useful in understanding the clinical relevance of PSMA PET responses to ADT and potentially the relationship to disease progression as it may relate to the genomic signature.
Authors: Christos Sachpekidis; Klaus Kopka; Matthias Eder; Boris A Hadaschik; Martin T Freitag; Leyun Pan; Uwe Haberkorn; Antonia Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: Steven P Rowe; Katarzyna J Macura; Esther Mena; Amanda L Blackford; Rosa Nadal; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Mario Eisenberger; Michael Carducci; Hong Fan; Robert F Dannals; Ying Chen; Ronnie C Mease; Zsolt Szabo; Martin G Pomper; Steve Y Cho Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Esther Mena; Maria L Lindenberg; Joanna H Shih; Stephen Adler; Stephanie Harmon; Ethan Bergvall; Deborah Citrin; William Dahut; Anita T Ton; Yolanda McKinney; Juanita Weaver; Philip Eclarinal; Alicia Forest; George Afari; Sibaprasad Bhattacharyya; Ronnie C Mease; Maria J Merino; Peter Pinto; Bradford J Wood; Paula Jacobs; Martin G Pomper; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-09-11 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Kambiz Rahbar; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Robert Seifert; Stefan Wagner; Michael Schäfers; Martin Bögemann; Matthias Weckesser Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-07-20 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Falguni Basuli; Tim E Phelps; Xiang Zhang; Carolyn C Woodroofe; Jyoti Roy; Peter L Choyke; Rolf E Swenson; Elaine M Jagoda Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2022-05-13