Sadaf Aghevlian1, Bo Wu1, Marina Nura Raie1, Spencer K Tumbale1, Aris J Kare1, Jai W Seo1, Katherine W Ferrara2. 1. Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford (MIPS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford (MIPS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. Electronic address: kwferrar@stanford.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A novel [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 immunoPET tracer was developed to image a CD40+ pancreatic tumor model in C57BL/6 mice and to study the biodistribution profile of the agonist CD40 (aCD40) monoclonal antibody (mAb) alone or combined with other mAbs. PROCEDURES: Copper-64 ([64Cu]Cu) labeled NOTA-aCD40 and NOTA-IgG (10 μg; 7 MBq) were injected intravenously into C57BL/6 mice with subcutaneous mT4 tumors to assess specificity 48 h post injection (p.i.) through positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging and biodistribution studies (n = 5). [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 was injected alone or simultaneously in combination with a therapeutic mass of cold aCD40 (100 μg), aPD-1 (200 μg) and aCTLA-4 (200 μg) mAbs. A group of mice with or without tumor received the second round of injections 1 or 3 weeks apart, respectively. PET/CT imaging and biodistribution studies were performed at 48 h p.i. The organ dose for [64Cu]Cu was estimated based on biodistribution studies with 2 μg [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 (corresponds to 5 mg patient dose) in non-tumor bearing mice. RESULTS: [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 accumulation was 2.3- and 7.8-fold higher than [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-IgG in tumors and spleen, respectively, indicating the specificity of aCD40 mAb in a mouse pancreatic tumor model. Tumor accumulation of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 was 21.2 ± 7.3%ID/g at 48 h after injection. Co-injection of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 with cold aCD40 mAb alone or with PD-1 and CTLA-4 mAbs reduced both spleen and tumor uptake, whereas liver uptake was increased. With the second round of injections, the liver was the only organ with substantial uptake. With a 2 μg administered dose of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 in a dosimetry study, the liver to spleen ratio was greater compared to the 10 μg dose (2.8 vs 0.37; respectively). The human equivalent for the highest dose organ (liver) was 198 ± 28.7 μSv/MBq. CONCLUSIONS: A CD40-immunoreactive [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 probe was developed. The ratio of spleen to liver accumulation exceeded that of the IgG isotype and was greatest with a single small, injected mass. The safety of human patient imaging with [64Cu]Cu was established based on extrapolation of the organ specificity to human imaging.
BACKGROUND: A novel [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 immunoPET tracer was developed to image a CD40+ pancreatic tumor model in C57BL/6 mice and to study the biodistribution profile of the agonist CD40 (aCD40) monoclonal antibody (mAb) alone or combined with other mAbs. PROCEDURES: Copper-64 ([64Cu]Cu) labeled NOTA-aCD40 and NOTA-IgG (10 μg; 7 MBq) were injected intravenously into C57BL/6 mice with subcutaneous mT4 tumors to assess specificity 48 h post injection (p.i.) through positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging and biodistribution studies (n = 5). [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 was injected alone or simultaneously in combination with a therapeutic mass of cold aCD40 (100 μg), aPD-1 (200 μg) and aCTLA-4 (200 μg) mAbs. A group of mice with or without tumor received the second round of injections 1 or 3 weeks apart, respectively. PET/CT imaging and biodistribution studies were performed at 48 h p.i. The organ dose for [64Cu]Cu was estimated based on biodistribution studies with 2 μg [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 (corresponds to 5 mg patient dose) in non-tumor bearing mice. RESULTS: [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 accumulation was 2.3- and 7.8-fold higher than [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-IgG in tumors and spleen, respectively, indicating the specificity of aCD40 mAb in a mouse pancreatic tumor model. Tumor accumulation of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 was 21.2 ± 7.3%ID/g at 48 h after injection. Co-injection of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 with cold aCD40 mAb alone or with PD-1 and CTLA-4 mAbs reduced both spleen and tumor uptake, whereas liver uptake was increased. With the second round of injections, the liver was the only organ with substantial uptake. With a 2 μg administered dose of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 in a dosimetry study, the liver to spleen ratio was greater compared to the 10 μg dose (2.8 vs 0.37; respectively). The human equivalent for the highest dose organ (liver) was 198 ± 28.7 μSv/MBq. CONCLUSIONS: A CD40-immunoreactive [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-aCD40 probe was developed. The ratio of spleen to liver accumulation exceeded that of the IgG isotype and was greatest with a single small, injected mass. The safety of human patient imaging with [64Cu]Cu was established based on extrapolation of the organ specificity to human imaging.
Authors: Sylvia F Boj; Chang-Il Hwang; Lindsey A Baker; Iok In Christine Chio; Dannielle D Engle; Vincenzo Corbo; Myrthe Jager; Mariano Ponz-Sarvise; Hervé Tiriac; Mona S Spector; Ana Gracanin; Tobiloba Oni; Kenneth H Yu; Ruben van Boxtel; Meritxell Huch; Keith D Rivera; John P Wilson; Michael E Feigin; Daniel Öhlund; Abram Handly-Santana; Christine M Ardito-Abraham; Michael Ludwig; Ela Elyada; Brinda Alagesan; Giulia Biffi; Georgi N Yordanov; Bethany Delcuze; Brianna Creighton; Kevin Wright; Youngkyu Park; Folkert H M Morsink; I Quintus Molenaar; Inne H Borel Rinkes; Edwin Cuppen; Yuan Hao; Ying Jin; Isaac J Nijman; Christine Iacobuzio-Donahue; Steven D Leach; Darryl J Pappin; Molly Hammell; David S Klimstra; Olca Basturk; Ralph H Hruban; George Johan Offerhaus; Robert G J Vries; Hans Clevers; David A Tuveson Journal: Cell Date: 2014-12-31 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Roy S Herbst; Jean-Charles Soria; Marcin Kowanetz; Gregg D Fine; Omid Hamid; Michael S Gordon; Jeffery A Sosman; David F McDermott; John D Powderly; Scott N Gettinger; Holbrook E K Kohrt; Leora Horn; Donald P Lawrence; Sandra Rost; Maya Leabman; Yuanyuan Xiao; Ahmad Mokatrin; Hartmut Koeppen; Priti S Hegde; Ira Mellman; Daniel S Chen; F Stephen Hodi Journal: Nature Date: 2014-11-27 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Laetitia E Lamberts; Simon P Williams; Anton G T Terwisscha van Scheltinga; Marjolijn N Lub-de Hooge; Carolien P Schröder; Jourik A Gietema; Adrienne H Brouwers; Elisabeth G E de Vries Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Pontus K E Börjesson; Yvonne W S Jauw; Remco de Bree; Jan C Roos; Jonas A Castelijns; C René Leemans; Guus A M S van Dongen; Ronald Boellaard Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-10-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: E Eriksson; R Moreno; I Milenova; L Liljenfeldt; L C Dieterich; L Christiansson; H Karlsson; G Ullenhag; S M Mangsbo; A Dimberg; R Alemany; A Loskog Journal: Gene Ther Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Sabine Hoves; Chia-Huey Ooi; Carsten Wolter; Hadassah Sade; Stefan Bissinger; Martina Schmittnaegel; Oliver Ast; Anna M Giusti; Katharina Wartha; Valeria Runza; Wei Xu; Yvonne Kienast; Michael A Cannarile; Hyam Levitsky; Solange Romagnoli; Michele De Palma; Dominik Rüttinger; Carola H Ries Journal: J Exp Med Date: 2018-02-07 Impact factor: 14.307