Strain-promoted azide-alkyne cycloaddition (SPAAC) is a straightforward and multipurpose conjugation strategy. The use of SPAAC to link different functional elements to prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligands would facilitate the development of a modular platform for PSMA-targeted imaging and therapy of prostate cancer (PCa). As a first proof of concept for the SPAAC chemistry platform, we synthesized and characterized four dual-labeled PSMA ligands for intraoperative radiodetection and fluorescence imaging of PCa. Ligands were synthesized using solid-phase chemistry and contained a chelator for 111In or 99mTc labeling. The fluorophore IRDye800CW was conjugated using SPAAC chemistry or conventional N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS)-ester coupling. Log D values were measured and PSMA specificity of these ligands was determined in LS174T-PSMA cells. Tumor targeting was evaluated in BALB/c nude mice with subcutaneous LS174T-PSMA and LS174T wild-type tumors using μSPECT/CT imaging, fluorescence imaging, and biodistribution studies. SPAAC chemistry increased the lipophilicity of the ligands (log D range: -2.4 to -4.4). In vivo, SPAAC chemistry ligands showed high and specific accumulation in s.c. LS174T-PSMA tumors up to 24 h after injection, enabling clear visualization using μSPECT/CT and fluorescence imaging. Overall, no significant differences between the SPAAC chemistry ligands and their NHS-based counterparts were found (2 h p.i., p > 0.05), while 111In-labeled ligands outperformed the 99mTc ligands. Here, we demonstrate that our newly developed SPAAC-based PSMA ligands show high PSMA-specific tumor targeting. The use of click chemistry in PSMA ligand development opens up the opportunity for fast, efficient, and versatile conjugations of multiple imaging moieties and/or drugs.
Strain-promoted azide-alkyne cycloaddition (SPAAC) is a straightforward and multipurpose conjugation strategy. The use of SPAAC to link different functional elements to prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligands would facilitate the development of a modular platform for PSMA-targeted imaging and therapy of prostate cancer (PCa). As a first proof of concept for the SPAAC chemistry platform, we synthesized and characterized four dual-labeled PSMA ligands for intraoperative radiodetection and fluorescence imaging of PCa. Ligands were synthesized using solid-phase chemistry and contained a chelator for 111In or 99mTc labeling. The fluorophore IRDye800CW was conjugated using SPAAC chemistry or conventional N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS)-ester coupling. Log D values were measured and PSMA specificity of these ligands was determined in LS174T-PSMA cells. Tumor targeting was evaluated in BALB/c nude mice with subcutaneous LS174T-PSMA and LS174T wild-type tumors using μSPECT/CT imaging, fluorescence imaging, and biodistribution studies. SPAAC chemistry increased the lipophilicity of the ligands (log D range: -2.4 to -4.4). In vivo, SPAAC chemistry ligands showed high and specific accumulation in s.c. LS174T-PSMA tumors up to 24 h after injection, enabling clear visualization using μSPECT/CT and fluorescence imaging. Overall, no significant differences between the SPAAC chemistry ligands and their NHS-based counterparts were found (2 h p.i., p > 0.05), while 111In-labeled ligands outperformed the 99mTc ligands. Here, we demonstrate that our newly developed SPAAC-based PSMA ligands show high PSMA-specific tumor targeting. The use of click chemistry in PSMA ligand development opens up the opportunity for fast, efficient, and versatile conjugations of multiple imaging moieties and/or drugs.
Prostate cancer (PCa)
is the second most common cancer in men worldwide,
leading to substantial morbidity and mortality.[1] About 90% of PCa patients have a localized tumor at initial
screening and are candidates for surgery.[2] The prostate is located between critical structures, and as a consequence,
the surgeon has to perform very narrow tumor resections.[3,4] In approximately 15–65% of PCa patients, dependent on the
disease stage, tumor resection is incomplete, caused by positive surgical
tumor margins upon removal of the primary tumor and/or incomplete
removal of tumor positive lymph nodes in the pelvis.[5,6] Innovative approaches to improve intraoperative tumor detection
can increase the chance of complete surgical resection of all tumor
tissue.To specifically detect prostate cancer cells during
surgery, prostate-specific
membrane antigen (PSMA) targeting ligands conjugated to one or multiple
imaging moieties can be used.[7,8] One of these imaging
moieties is a fluorophore. Fluorescence imaging allows direct visualization
of tumor tissue during surgery.[9] This enables
a more precise removal of the primary tumor with less positive surgical
margins as a result. Another approach is radioguided surgery using
a γ-emitting radionuclide, which allows for an intraoperative
detection of deeper-seated tumor lesions and metastatic lymph nodes.[10] Moreover, dual-labeling of PSMA-targeting ligands
can provide a powerful combination of the two complementary modalities
mentioned above.[4] Therefore, we focused
on fluorescence imaging combined with the radionuclide detection of
PCa using dual-labeled PSMA-targeting ligands.To develop a
versatile platform that enables easy synthesis of
PSMA ligands, strain-promoted azide–alkyne cycloaddition (SPAAC,
N3-DBCO) can be used, a well-known form of click chemistry.[11−13] Click chemistry reactions proceed with ease under mild nontoxic
conditions (i.e., at room temperature in water) tolerating
the presence of a wide range of functional groups. Hence, strain-promoted
cycloadditions provide fast and highly efficient chemistry to link
PSMA ligands to different functional elements.[11,14] Nonetheless, there is still uncertainty about the influence of the
hydrophobic functional group dibenzocyclooctene that is introduced
with SPAAC on the pharmacokinetics and nonspecific uptake of the ligands.[11,15,16] Therefore, the aim of the current
study is to develop dual-labeled small-molecule PSMA ligands that
can be conjugated to different functional components using SPAAC chemistry
(N3-DBCO) and to evaluate the effects of the hydrophobic
dibenzocyclooctene group on the binding affinity, pharmacokinetics,
and biodistribution of the ligand.As a first proof of concept
for the SPAAC chemistry-based PSMA-targeting
platform, we synthesized PSMA ligands that were conjugated with the
near-infrared (NIR) fluorophore IRDye800CW using SPAAC chemistry.
Moreover, a chelator for either technetium-99m (99mTc)
or indium-111 (111In) radiolabeling was added. We compared
the SPAAC-based PSMA-targeting ligands with similar ligands where
conventional N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS)–ester
coupling of IRDye800CW was used. With these in hand, we could determine
the effect of conjugation strategy (SPAAC vs NHS)
on the PSMA-binding affinity, biodistribution, and pharmacokinetics
of these novel dual-labeled ligands. As a secondary aim, we evaluated
the differences in affinity and biodistribution of the 111In-labeled ligands and their 99mTc-labeled equivalents.
Results
Design
and Synthesis
PSMA-1007 was previously reported
to perfectly fit the active site as well as the entrance funnel of
PSMA (Figure S4).[17−19] Therefore,
the design of our ligands is based on this high-affinity ligand, meaning
that it consists of a naphthylalanine, aminomethyl benzoic acid, a
glutamic acid, and a nicotinic acid (nonfluorinated). Importantly,
the backbone of PSMA-1007 also contains two glutamic acid residues,
of which the most C-terminal glutamic acid is oriented toward the
exterior of PSMA (Figure S4, red circle).
To synthesize dual-labeled ligands, we replaced the most C-terminal
glutamic acid residue in the backbone of PSMA-1007 with a lysine.
This lysine is then oriented toward the exterior of PSMA in the same
manner as the side chain of the original glutamic acid is, providing
space for conjugation of multiple functional moieties. To the side
chain of this lysine, we added another lysine or azidolysine to introduce
two groups that could be further functionalized with a metal chelator
as well as a fluorophore. Most of the synthesis was performed on the
solid phase, including the incorporation of a 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic
acid (DOTA) or mercaptoacetylglycylglycylglycine (MAG3) chelator.
After cleavage from the resin, we conjugated all ligands in solution
with IRDye800CW via either SPAAC (N3-DBCO) or NHS-ester-based
chemistry. The following ligands were synthesized: PSMA-N048 (KuE-linker-DOTA-SPAAC-IRDye800CW),
PSMA-N049 (KuE-linker-MAG3-SPAAC-IRDye800CW), PSMA-N050 (KuE-linker-DOTA-NHS-IRDye800CW),
and PSMA-N051 (KuE-linker-MAG3-NHS-IRDye800CW) (Figure ). The ligands are further referred to as
N48, N49, N50, and N51.
Figure 1
Chemical structures of PSMA-N048 (N48), PSMA-N049
(N49), PSMA-N050
(N50), and PSMA-N051 (N51). Ligands consisting of KuE (blue), linker
(black), SPAAC (red), IRDye800CW (green), and MAG3 or DOTA chelator
(purple).
Chemical structures of PSMA-N048 (N48), PSMA-N049
(N49), PSMA-N050
(N50), and PSMA-N051 (N51). Ligands consisting of KuE (blue), linker
(black), SPAAC (red), IRDye800CW (green), and MAG3 or DOTA chelator
(purple).
Radiolabeling of the Ligands
RCY of 111In-labeled
ligands (N48 and N50) exceeded 93% in all experiments (molar activity
30–33 MBq/nmol). RCY of 99mTc-labeled ligands ranged
between 15 and 69% (molar activity 22–100 MBq/nmol). All ligands
were purified, resulting in a radiochemical purity >95% as determined
by instant thin-layer chromatography (ITLC) and high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC). The stability of the radiolabeled ligands in
human serum was determined by RP-HPLC. After incubation for 2 h at
37 °C, there were no changes in the pattern of the HPLC peaks,
indicating that the radiolabel was stably coupled and there was no
decomposition of the ligand (Figure S5).
In Vitro Characterization of the Ligands
To characterize the four ligands, we first measured the distribution
coefficient (log D at pH 7.4), to determine
the effect of the dibenzocyclooctene group on the lipophilicity of
the PSMA ligand (Figure A). The log D of 99mTc-N49 was
−2.4 compared with −3.5 for its NHS-based equivalent 99mTc-N51 (p < 0.01). The log D of 111In-N48 (SPAAC) was −3.2 compared
with −4.4 for 111In-PSMA-N50 (NHS) (p < 0.001). Hence, as expected the ligands with the dibenzocyclooctene
group for SPAAC chemistry were more lipophilic. The use of MAG3 compared
with DOTA as a chelator increased lipophilicity as well (p < 0.01). In addition to the lipophilicity, we determined the
IC50 values of the nonradiolabeled ligands, which ranged
between 184 and 475 nM (p = 0.11) (Figures A and S6).
Figure 2
In vitro characterization of N48, N49,
N50, and
N51. (A) IC50 values of ligands as determined in competitive
binding assays using LS174T-PSMA cells. IC50 values were
determined using a nonradiolabeled ligand (N48, N49, N50, and N51)
in competition with 111In-labeled PSMA-617. Lipophilicity
of ligands expressed in log D values. Internalization
ratio as determined in LS174T-PSMA cells. (B) Membrane binding and
internalization kinetics of N48, N49, N50, and N51 in LS174T-PSMA-positive
and -negative cells. Nonspecific binding was determined by blocking
with an excess of 2-PMPA (50 μg). PSMA-617 was added as a positive
control.
In vitro characterization of N48, N49,
N50, and
N51. (A) IC50 values of ligands as determined in competitive
binding assays using LS174T-PSMA cells. IC50 values were
determined using a nonradiolabeled ligand (N48, N49, N50, and N51)
in competition with 111In-labeled PSMA-617. Lipophilicity
of ligands expressed in log D values. Internalization
ratio as determined in LS174T-PSMA cells. (B) Membrane binding and
internalization kinetics of N48, N49, N50, and N51 in LS174T-PSMA-positive
and -negative cells. Nonspecific binding was determined by blocking
with an excess of 2-PMPA (50 μg). PSMA-617 was added as a positive
control.Next, we verified the PSMA-binding
potential of our ligands in
an in vitro binding and internalization assay using
PSMA-positive and -negative cells, in which all four ligands showed
PSMA-specific binding (Figure B). The use of SPAAC chemistry led to a significantly lower
total binding of the ligand; 3.9 ± 0.5% for 99mTc-N49
and 8.9 ± 0.6% for 111In-N48, compared with NHS-conjugated
variants; 22.9 ± 1.6% for 99mTc-N51 and 17.2 ±
3.5% for 111In-N50 (Figure B, p < 0.001). As a reference,
we determined the total binding of 111In-PSMA-617 in our
assay, which was 13.4 ± 3.5%. For all ligands, the internalized
fraction ranged between 61.0 and 80.6% of the total cell-associated
activity and did not differ significantly (Figure A). Minimal binding and internalization were
observed in PSMA- negative cells or PSMA-positive cells incubated
with an excess of 2-PMPA, demonstrating that, despite their higher
lipophilicity, the SPAAC chemistry-based ligands do not suffer from
nonspecific binding and uptake (Figure B).
Pharmacokinetics of SPAAC-Based Ligands
To establish
the pharmacokinetics of the SPAAC-based PSMA ligands, the ex vivo biodistribution of 99mTc-N49 and 111In-N48 was determined 2, 4, and 24 h p.i. in mice bearing
LS174T-PSMA-positive and -negative tumors. 99mTc-N49 showed
PSMA-specific tumor uptake >8%ID/g, which was stable up to 24 h
after
injection (Figure A and Supplementary Table 1). Tumor uptake
of 111In-N48 was 23.8 ± 3.9%ID/g and 22.7 ± 1.5%ID/g
2 and 4 h p.i., respectively. Yet, after 24 h p.i. tumor uptake of 111In-N48 significantly decreased to 17.6 ± 1.8%ID/g (p < 0.05). Tumor uptake of the 111In-labeled
ligand N48 was significantly higher compared with the 99mTc-labeled ligand N49 at all three timepoints measured (p < 0.05 for all timepoints).
Figure 3
In vivo pharmacokinetics
of 99mTc-N49
and 111In-N48. (A) Biodistribution as determined after
dissection of 99mTc-N49 (3 MBq/mouse) and 111In-N48 (10 MBq/mouse) 2, 4, and 24 h p.i. (0.3 nmol, n = 5/group). Biodistribution was determined in mice bearing subcutaneous
LS174T-PSMA and LS174T wild-type xenografts. Data are expressed as
%ID/g ± SD; ** indicates p < 0.01.
(B) Representative μSPECT/CT scans and fluorescence images of
mice with s.c. LS174T-PSMA (left) and wild-type LS174T (right) tumors
after i.v. injection of 99mTc-N49 (3 MBq/mouse) and 111In-N48 (10 MBq/mouse) 2, 4, and 24 h p.i.
In vivo pharmacokinetics
of 99mTc-N49
and 111In-N48. (A) Biodistribution as determined after
dissection of 99mTc-N49 (3 MBq/mouse) and 111In-N48 (10 MBq/mouse) 2, 4, and 24 h p.i. (0.3 nmol, n = 5/group). Biodistribution was determined in mice bearing subcutaneous
LS174T-PSMA and LS174T wild-type xenografts. Data are expressed as
%ID/g ± SD; ** indicates p < 0.01.
(B) Representative μSPECT/CT scans and fluorescence images of
mice with s.c. LS174T-PSMA (left) and wild-type LS174T (right) tumors
after i.v. injection of 99mTc-N49 (3 MBq/mouse) and 111In-N48 (10 MBq/mouse) 2, 4, and 24 h p.i.For both ligands, the amount of tracer present in the blood
over
time decreased from 2–3%ID/g (2 h p.i.) to <0.3%ID/g (24
h p.i.). Furthermore, accumulation of the two ligands in other organs
including the PSMA-negative tumor, spleen, liver, prostate, and salivary
glands was low (<5%ID/g) at the 2 h p.i. timepoint and further
decreased over the course of 24 h, leading to high tumor-to-background
ratios at all timepoints measured (Supplementary Table 1). μSPECT/CT and fluorescence imaging of the mice
revealed that both ligands clearly visualized the subcutaneous LS174T-PSMA
tumors (left flank) up to 4 h p.i. (Figure B).
Biodistribution Comparison of SPAAC- and
NHS-Based Ligands
To determine the effect of conjugation
chemistry (SPAAC vs NHS) on the in vivo performance of the
PSMA ligands, their tumor and normal tissue uptake was determined
in mice bearing both a PSMA-positive and -negative LS174T tumor 2
h after injection (Figure A and Supplementary Table 2). Despite
the high tumor uptake of all four ligands tested, the NHS-based ligands
showed higher tumor accumulation compared to their SPAAC-based counterparts
(not significant, p > 0.05). Tumor uptake of N48
(SPAAC) and N50 (NHS) labeled with 111In were 21.2 ±
1.2%ID/g and 25.3 ± 2.0%ID/g, respectively. The lowest uptake
in the PSMA-expressing tumors was measured for the 99mTc-labeled
ligands; 12.0 ± 1.4%ID/g and 17.7 ±3.7%ID/g for N49 (SPAAC)
and N51 (NHS), respectively. In our LS174T s.c. tumor model, uptake
of 111In-N50 was significantly higher than both 99mTc-labeled ligands (p < 0.01) and control ligand 111In-PSMA-617 (18.5 ± 1.9%ID/g, p <
0.05). All four ligands showed a significantly higher uptake in the
PSMA-positive tumor compared to the PSMA-negative tumor (p < 0.001) (Figure A and Supplementary Table 2).
Figure 4
In
vivo comparison of N48, N49, N50, and N51.
(A) Biodistribution as determined after dissection and (B) resulting
tumor-to-organ ratios of four 111In- (10 MBq/mouse) or 99mTc-labeled (15 MBq/mouse) ligands and positive control PSMA-617
(0.3 nmol, 2 h p.i., n = 5/group). Biodistribution
was determined in mice bearing subcutaneous LS174T-PSMA and LS174T
wild-type xenografts. Data are expressed as %ID/g ± SD; * indicates p < 0.05, ** indicates p <
0.01, and *** indicates p < 0.001.
In
vivo comparison of N48, N49, N50, and N51.
(A) Biodistribution as determined after dissection and (B) resulting
tumor-to-organ ratios of four 111In- (10 MBq/mouse) or 99mTc-labeled (15 MBq/mouse) ligands and positive control PSMA-617
(0.3 nmol, 2 h p.i., n = 5/group). Biodistribution
was determined in mice bearing subcutaneous LS174T-PSMA and LS174T
wild-type xenografts. Data are expressed as %ID/g ± SD; * indicates p < 0.05, ** indicates p <
0.01, and *** indicates p < 0.001.All ligands showed rapid blood clearance and minimal
uptake in
muscle, bone, salivary glands, and prostate at 2 h after injection,
leading to high tumor-to-organ ratios (Figure B and Supplementary Table 2). The SPAAC chemistry-based ligands showed a higher liver
uptake compared to their NHS-based equivalents; 4.3 ± 0.3%ID/g
(SPAAC) vs 1.7 ± 0.3%ID/g (NHS) for 99mTc and 3.4 ± 0.3%ID/g (SPAAC) vs 1.2 ±
0.1%ID/g (NHS) for 111In (p < 0.05).
Ligand accumulation in the excretory organ, the kidneys, was similar
for both conjugation strategies but lower for the 99mTc-labeled
ligands (range 73.9–81.6%ID/g), compared with the 111In-labeled ligands (>120%ID/g, p < 0.001).
Multimodal Imaging of Subcutaneous PSMA-Positive Tumors
To compare the multimodal imaging potential of our SPAAC chemistry-based
ligands to that of their NHS-based equivalents, we scanned mice using
both a μSPECT/CT and a fluorescence scanner. Figure shows representative back-
and side-view μSPECT/CT images (Figure A) and the corresponding fluorescence images
(Figure B) of all
four ligands 2 h after injection. No large differences in imaging
potential were observed between the SPAAC and NHS-based ligands. All
ligands could clearly visualize the subcutaneous LS174T-PSMA tumors
(right flank), without showing clearly visible uptake in the PSMA-negative
LS174T tumors (left flank). In addition, multimodal images visualized
high renal tracer accumulation in all mice.
Figure 5
All ligands clearly visualize
PSMA-positive tumors using both μSPECT/CT
and fluorescence imaging. Representative μSPECT/CT scans (A)
and fluorescence images (B) of mice with s.c. LS174T-PSMA (right)
and wild-type LS174T (left) tumors after i.v. injection of 111In- (10 MBq/mouse) or 99mTc-labeled (15 MBq/mouse) ligands
(0.3 nmol, 2 h p.i.).
All ligands clearly visualize
PSMA-positive tumors using both μSPECT/CT
and fluorescence imaging. Representative μSPECT/CT scans (A)
and fluorescence images (B) of mice with s.c. LS174T-PSMA (right)
and wild-type LS174T (left) tumors after i.v. injection of 111In- (10 MBq/mouse) or 99mTc-labeled (15 MBq/mouse) ligands
(0.3 nmol, 2 h p.i.).
Multimodal Imaging of Intraperitoneal
Tumors
To evaluate
the applicability of the dual-labeled PSMA ligands for image-guided
resections in a more clinically relevant setting, we injected six
mice with intraperitoneal LS174T-PSMA-positive tumors with our ligand 111In-N50. Two hours after injection of the ligand, a preoperative
μSPECT/CT scan was acquired, on which multiple i.p. tumors could
be visualized (Figure C). Next, we carried out image-guided resection of the i.p. tumors,
of which Figure shows
one illustrative example. NIR fluorescence imaging immediately revealed
a tumor at the injection site, also visible on μSPECT/CT (Figure A1,2,6C, red arrow). After removal of the tumor at the injection
site, fluorescence imaging revealed a large tumor in the abdomen (Figure A3,4) and multiple
tumors close to the spleen and pancreas (Figure A3–5), all visible on μSPECT/CT
as well (Figure C
green and pink arrows). Finally, small nodules beneath the liver were
found (Figure A5,6C, yellow arrow). All resected tumors showed fluorescent
uptake (Figure B).
The kidneys were highly fluorescent as well, which hampered the detection
of tumor lesions in close proximity to these execratory organs in
mice.
Figure 6
Multimodal fluorescence and μSPECT/CT imaging of intraperitoneal
PSMA-positive tumors using 111In-N50. Mouse with several
intraperitoneal LS174T-PSMA tumors located at different depths in
the peritoneal cavity. (A) Same-scale NIRF images of mouse with several
intraperitoneal tumors after i.v. injection of 111In-labeled
N50 (0.3 nmol, 10 MBq/mouse, 2 h p.i.). (B) NIRF image of removed
tumors. (C) Corresponding μSPECT/CT images in supine and left
lateral positions.
Multimodal fluorescence and μSPECT/CT imaging of intraperitoneal
PSMA-positive tumors using 111In-N50. Mouse with several
intraperitoneal LS174T-PSMA tumors located at different depths in
the peritoneal cavity. (A) Same-scale NIRF images of mouse with several
intraperitoneal tumors after i.v. injection of 111In-labeled
N50 (0.3 nmol, 10 MBq/mouse, 2 h p.i.). (B) NIRF image of removed
tumors. (C) Corresponding μSPECT/CT images in supine and left
lateral positions.
Discussion
In
this study, we used strain-promoted azide–alkyne cycloaddition
(SPAAC) chemistry to synthesize dual-labeled PSMA-targeting ligands
that could aid in the intraoperative detection and resection of PCa.
The literature has indicated that the dibenzocyclooctene group, present
in the ligand after SPAAC chemistry, is rather hydrophobic and could
negatively impact the affinity and nonspecific binding of small PSMA-targeting
ligands. Therefore, we compared the performance of our SPAAC-based
ligands with conventional NHS-ester-based PSMA ligands. Withal, the
SPAAC-based ligands showed similar high affinity toward PSMA in vitro, and specific uptake and retention in PSMA-positive
tumors in vivo, compared to NHS-based ligands. This
indicates the feasibility of SPAAC chemistry as a versatile conjugation
strategy in high-affinity PSMA ligand design.Click chemistry
has been used in many research fields because of
its beneficial characteristics, including high yield, high specificity,
and simplicity.[20] More specifically, it
enables reasonably fast kinetics under aqueous conditions in the presence
of a wide range of functional groups and no high temperatures are
required.[21] However, the dibenzocyclooctene
group used in SPAAC chemistry is rather lipophilic and could alter
the affinity, internalization, and nonspecific binding of small PSMA-targeting
ligands in vitro.[22,23] On the contrary,
Wirtz et al. found that higher lipophilicity of their PSMA-I&T-based
ligands is beneficial in terms of affinity and internalization, possibly
because of ligand interaction with a lipophilic binding pocket of
PSMA.[24] log D determination
in our study showed that SPAAC chemistry conjugation of IRDye800CW
indeed leads to more lipophilic ligands. We determined the IC50 values of all four ligands to be in the same order of magnitude
(184–475 nM). Importantly, IC50 values were determined
using the nonradiolabeled ligand and without a nonradioactive metal
(Re/In) present in the chelator. Complexation of a metal in the chelator
could alter ligand properties (e.g., charge, hydrophilicity, etc.) and with it ligand affinity.[25] Overall, the affinity of the ligands was lower than that of the
high-affinity PSMA-617 ligand (IC50: 8.5 nM). Yet, other
IRDye800CW conjugated PSMA ligands reported in the literature also
showed higher affinities (25 nM–1.7 μM) compared to the
nonfluorescent ones like PSMA-617.[25,26]Despite
their lower affinity, ligand uptake in the PSMA-positive
tumor of our four ligands was comparable with PSMA-617. Possible explanations
for this discrepancy might be the increased internalization of the
dual-labeled ligands compared with PSMA-617, which could lead to increased
ligand retention in the tumor. Moreover, the dual-labeled ligands
show a longer blood circulatory half-life (possibly due to larger
size/charge/lipophilicity) compared to PSMA-617, which could also
result in increased tumor uptake (Figure A).[27] In line
with this, the study of Baranski et al. showed that the addition of
a fluorophore (including IRDye800CW) also decreased PSMA ligand affinity,
while it increased ligand uptake in PSMA-positive LNCaP tumors.[25]Next to the addition of the dye, higher
ligand lipophilicity (due
to the DBCO group) was reported to increase, bus also decrease tumor
uptake of various click-chemistry-based tracers. Moreover, a lipophilic
character of the tracer can increase nonspecific uptake in other organs.[20,22−24,28] In the case of PSMA
ligands, higher ligand lipophilicity of PSMA-I&T-based ligands
led to an increase in tumor uptake in LNCaP xenografts.[24] In addition, Böhmer et al. developed
and characterized a copper(I)-catalyzed azide–alkyne cycloaddition
(CuAAC) based PSMA ligand for PET imaging called [18F]PSMA-MIC01.[29] This CuAAC-based ligand showed specific tumor
uptake in LNCaP xenografts (11.7 ± 4.2%ID/g, 1 h p.i.) with only
minor nonspecific uptake in other organs. In our study, the SPAAC
chemistry PSMA ligands similarly showed high PSMA-specific tumor uptake
with low nonspecific accumulation in other organs (e.g., PSMA-negative tumor, prostate, salivary glands). Yet, as might
be expected, a more than 2-fold higher liver uptake was measured for
the SPAAC variants. These data are in line with the statement of Notni
et al. that a lipophilic character of the ligand, induced by large
hydrophobic groups (i.e., aromatics such as in dibenzocyclooctene),
is prone to increase the fraction of slow hepatobiliary clearance.[23]Tumor-specific uptake values of clinically
used ligands such as
PSMA-617, PSMA-I&T, and PSMA-1007 reported in the literature range
from 5 to 13%ID/g (LNCaP, 1/2 h p.i).[17,30−33] Tumor uptake of N49 (9%ID/g) was in a similar range and uptake of
N48 (21%ID/g) was perhaps even higher (LS174T-PSMA, 2 h p.i). Nonetheless,
no direct comparison could be made due to the use of the LS174T-PSMA
xenografts in this study compared with LNCaP xenografts used in the
literature. However, a direct comparison of the LNCaP and LS174T-PSMA
xenograft models did not show major differences in PSMA-I&T tracer
uptake between these models,[32] strongly
indicating that the performance of our SPAAC ligands was in a similar
range to those of the clinically available ligands.[33−37]For radioguided surgery, 99mTc and 111In
are used because they emit γ-photons detectable with a handheld
γ probe. In the present study, as a secondary aim, we evaluated
differences between DOTA-based ligands suitable for 111In-labeling (N48, N50) and MAG3-based ligands for labeling with 99mTc (N49, N51). Chelation of 111In in DOTA leads
to a neutral charge, whereas chelation of 99mTc in MAG3
leads to a net charge of -1, which might be advantageous since the
introduction of negative charges to increase PSMA affinity and ligand
uptake in PSMA-positive tumors was reported in multiple studies.[27,38−40] However, the use of MAG3 compared with DOTA as a
chelator increased lipophilicity, which could also influence tumor
uptake and affinity of the PSMA ligand. Our results show that the 111In-DOTA ligands have a significantly higher uptake in the
s.c. LS174T-PSMA-positive tumors compared with the 99mTc-MAG3
ligands. Besides favorable in vitro and in
vivo properties of the 111In-labeled ligands,
labeling of 99mTc in the MAG3 chelator resulted in low
RCY (15–69%), which was highly variable between each labeling.
In comparison, labeling with 111In always resulted in high
RCY (≥93%). Furthermore, the use of MAG3 as a chelator led
to more difficulties with the synthesis and overall stability of the
N51 ligand (data not shown). Consequently, DOTA-based ligands might
be preferred over MAG3-based variants.As shown in the i.p.
model presented in this study, tumors located
deeper inside the surgical cavity may not be visualized with NIR fluorescence
imaging alone due to the absorption of the emitted fluorescent light
in overlying tissues (2–3 mm).[41] This further emphasizes the importance of dual-labeled NIR fluorescence
and radionuclide targeting agents that, in addition to preoperative
tumor localization, allow intraoperative mapping of more deeply situated
tumor lesions with a γ probe. The findings of the current study
encourage clinical studies with PSMA-targeted dual-labeled ligands
to enable image-guided complete resection of all PCa lesions during
radical prostatectomy, preventing cancer recurrences and improving
the chances for curative PCa surgeries.The SPAAC-based conjugation
strategy presented in this study provides
a versatile platform in which PSMA ligands can easily be coupled to
different chelators, fluorophores or anticancer drugs. In the future,
it offers the opportunity to click various imaging moieties (e.g., fluorophores, radionuclides or MRI contrast agents)
to the ligand for preclinical microscopy, as well as clinical diagnostic,
pre- and intraoperative imaging of PCa. In addition, theranostic tracers
could be synthesized that include therapeutic elements such as α-
or β–-emitting radionuclides for radioligand
therapy, photosensitizers for PSMA-targeted photodynamic therapy,
or anticancer drugs including immunomodulatory agents and chemotherapeutics.
Finally, moieties that improve the pharmacokinetics of the ligands
could be easily incorporated. For example, albumin binders such as
Evans blue could be added. In the study of Wang et al. addition of
Evans blue to PSMA-617 already led to major improvements in the pharmacokinetics
of the ligand (e.g., significantly higher tumor accumulation
and highly radiotherapeutic efficacy).[42] In addition, Kuo et al. recently showed that albumin binder optimization
and use of these optimal albumin binders could lead to enhanced tumor
uptake and tumor-to-kidney absorbed dose ratios in 177Lu-labeled
PSMA ligands.[43]
Conclusions
We
developed four dual-labeled ligands which all showed high PSMA
affinity and excellent PSMA-specific tumor uptake. We compared an
NHS and SPAAC chemistry-based approach to attach the fluorophore IRDye800CW.
Overall, no significant differences between the SPAAC chemistry ligands
and their NHS-based counterparts were found, while 111In-labeled
ligands outperformed the 99mTc ligands. These results inspire
the use of click chemistry conjugations in PSMA ligand development
to enable fast, efficient, and easy coupling of various chelators,
dyes, or even anticancer drugs.
Experimental Procedures
Synthesis
of Ligands
We synthesized KuE-based PSMA
ligands with the chelator mercaptoacetylglycylglycylglycine (MAG3)
for 99mTc labeling, or the chelator 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic
acid (DOTA) for 111In labeling using standard Fmoc solid-phase
chemistry. After cleavage from the resin and intermediate preparative
HPLC purification, fluorophore IRDye800CW was conjugated to the ligands
via either SPAAC or NHS-ester coupling in solution. Full synthetic
procedures can be found in the supplementals (Page 1–6, Figures S1–S3). The ligands are further
referred to as N48 (KuE-linker-DOTA-SPAAC-IRDye800CW), N49 (KuE-linker-MAG3-SPAAC-IRDye800CW),
N50 (KuE-linker-DOTA-NHS-IRDye800CW), and N51 (KuE-linker-MAG3-NHS-IRDye800CW)
(Figures and 2A).
Cell Culture
The LS174T colon carcinoma
cell line was
purchased from the American Type Culture Collection. LS174T-PSMA cells
were created by stable transfection with human PSMA using the plasmid
pcDNA3.1-hPSMA.[5] Wild-type LS174T colon
carcinoma cells were used as a control. All cells were cultured in
RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 10% FCS and 2 mM glutamine (5%
CO2, 37 °C). Additionally, LS174T-PSMA cells were
cultured in the presence of 0.3 mg/mL G418 geneticin.
Radiolabeling
Indium-111: Ligands (1–20 μg)
were radiolabeled under metal-free conditions with 111InCl3 (Curium) in 0.5 M 2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic
acid (MES) buffer (pH 5.5, twice volume of 111InCl3). Labeling was performed at 90 °C for 30 min.[44] Ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid (EDTA, 50 mM)
was added to a final concentration of 5 mM after the incubation. Molar
activity after labeling ranged from 30 to 33 MBq/nmol. Ligands were
purified by a Sep-Pak C18 light cartridge (Waters) and eluted from
the cartridge with 50% ethanol in water.Technetium-99m: Ligands
(1–20 μg,) were radiolabeled in 45 μL of ammonium
acetate (NH4Ac, 0.25 M, pH 8) and 15 μL of freshly
prepared disodium tartrate buffer (50 mg/mL in 0.25 M NH4Ac), under metal-free conditions. Ascorbic acid buffer was prepared
just before labeling (3 mg/mL in 10 mM HCl). Next, 5 μL of freshly
prepared stannous chloride dihydrate (SnCl2) buffer (4
μg/mL in ascorbic acid buffer) was added simultaneously with 99mTcO4– in saline, followed by
incubation for 30 min at 90 °C. Molar activity after labeling
ranged from 16 to 100 MBq/nmol. Ligands were purified by a Sep-Pak
C18 light cartridge (Waters) and eluted from the cartridge with 50%
ethanol in water.ITLC/HPLC: Radiochemical yield (RCY) was determined
by instant
thin-layer chromatography (ITLC) using silica gel-coated paper (Agilent
Technologies) and 0.1 M ammonium acetate containing 0.1 M EDTA pH
5.5 (111In) or 0.1 M Sodium Citrate pH 6.0 (99mTc), as the mobile phase. In addition, RCY was measured using reverse-phase
high-performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC) on an Agilent 1200
system (Agilent Technologies) with an in-line radiodetector (Elysia-Raytest).
A C18 column (5 μm, 4.6 × 250 mm2; HiChrom)
was used at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. We used the following buffer
system: buffer A, triethylammonium acetate (TEAA, 10 mM, pH 7); buffer
B, 100% methanol; and a gradient of 97–0% buffer A (35 min).
Binding, Internalization, and IC50 Assay
Internalization
assay: Binding and internalization characteristics of all ligands
were compared using LS174T-PSMA and wild-type LS174T cells, cultured
to confluency in six-well plates. The cells were incubated with 50 000
counts per minute (cpm) 111In- or 99mTc-labeled
PSMA ligand (0.1–0.25 pmol/well) in 1 mL of binding buffer
(RPMI/0.5% BSA) for 2 h at 37 °C. Nonspecific binding was determined
by co-incubation with 2-(phosphonomethyl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid (2-PMPA,
21.57 μM). The cells were washed with PBS and incubated with
acid buffer (0.1 M acetic acid, 154 mM NaCl, pH 2.6) for 10 min at
0 °C to retrieve the membrane-bound fraction. After this, the
membrane-bound fraction was collected, the cells were washed and lysed
with 1.5 mL of 0.1 M NaOH, and cell lysis (intracellular activity)
was collected. Membrane-bound activity and intracellular activity
fractions were measured in a γ-counter (2480 WIZARD[2] Automatic γ Counter, PerkinElmer).[5,45] IC50: The 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) of the ligands was determined using LS174T-PSMA cells in a competitive
binding assay. The LS174T-PSMA cells were cultured to confluency in
six-well plates, followed by incubation on ice for 2 h in 1 mL of
binding buffer (RPMI/0.5% BSA) with 50 000 cpm of 111In-labeled PSMA-617 and a series of increasing concentrations (0.01–300
nM) of unlabeled PSMA ligands. After incubation, the cells were washed
with 2 mL of PBS and lysed with 1.5 mL of 0.1 M NaOH. Cell lysis was
collected from the plate and the cell-associated activity was measured
in a γ-counter and IC50 values were calculated using
GraphPad Prism software version 5.03.
Lipophilicity
Log D values
of all radiolabeled ligands were determined by adding 300 000
cpm (0.6–1.5 pmol) to a mixture of 3 mL of PBS (pH 7.4) and
3 mL of n-octanol. Tubes were vortexed vigorously
for 1 min and centrifuged for 5 min at 201g. The
concentration of radioactivity in a defined volume of each layer was
measured in a well-type γ-counter.
Subcutaneous Tumor Model
Animal experiments were performed
in 8- to 10-week-old male BALB/c nude mice (Janvier). The animals
were housed under nonsterile conditions in individually ventilated
cages (Blue line IVC, 4–5 mice per cage) with cage enrichment
present and free access to water and chlorophyll-free animal chow
(Sniff GmbH). The mice were subcutaneously inoculated with 3.0 ×
106 LS174T-PSMA cells in the right flank and 1.5 ×
106 LS174T wild-type cells in the left flank, diluted in
200 μL of complete RPMI 1640 medium. When xenografts were approximately
0.1 cm3 (10–14 days after tumor inoculation), tracers
were injected intravenously in the tail vein. The biotechnicians performing
the s.c. and i.v. injections were blinded for the experimental groups
and tumor-bearing mice were block-randomized into groups based on
tumor size. All experiments were conducted in accordance with the
guidelines of the Revised Dutch Act on Animal Experimentation and
approved by the institutional Animal Welfare Committee of the Radboud
university medical center.
Biodistribution, Fluorescence Imaging, and
μSPECT/CT Imaging
N48, N49, N50, and N51 were radiolabeled
with 111In
or 99mTc. Radio-HPLC chromatograms before and after Sep-Pak
C18 purification show the radiochemical purity of the product before
injection in mice (Figure S7). The mice
were injected intravenously with 10 MBq 111In-labeled N48,
N50, or PSMA-617 as control (0.3 nmol, molar activity 33.3 MBq/nmol)
or 15 MBq 99mTc-labeled N49 or N50 (0.3 nmol, molar activity
50 MBq/nmol) in PBS/0.5% BSA. Two hours post injection (p.i.), the
mice were euthanized by CO2/O2 asphyxiation,
and images were acquired with the IVIS fluorescence imaging system
(Xenogen VivoVision IVIS Lumina II, PerkinElmer), using an acquisition
time of 30 s. Subsequently, μSPECT/CT images were acquired (U-SPECT
II, MILabs) with a 1.0 mm diameter pinhole mouse collimator tube.[46] The mice were scanned for 30 min followed by
a CT scan (spatial resolution 160 μm, 65 kV, 615 μA) for
anatomical reference. μSPECT/CT scans were reconstructed with
MILabs reconstruction software, using an ordered-subset expectation
maximization algorithm, energy windows 154–188 keV and 220–270
keV for 111In, and 126–154 keV for 99mTc, 1 iteration, 16 subsets, voxel size of 0.4 mm. μSPECT/CT
scans were analyzed and maximum intensity projections (MIPs) were
created using the Inveon Research Workplace software version 4.1 (Siemens
Preclinical Solutions). NIRF images were analyzed using Living Image
software version 4.2 (Caliper Life Sciences). Tumors, blood, and relevant
organs and tissues were dissected, weighed, and radioactivity in each
sample was quantified using a well-type γ-counter. The results
were expressed as the percentage of injected dose per gram of tissue
(%ID/g).
Pharmacokinetics
To determine the pharmacokinetics
of the ligands, nine groups of five mice received an intravenous injection
of 0.3 nmol 111In-labeled N48 or N50 (10 MBq/mouse, molar
activity 33.3 MBq/nmol) or 99mTc-labeled N49 (5 MBq/mouse,
molar activity 16.7 MBq/nmol) in PBS/0.5% BSA. At 2, 4, and 24 h p.i.,
the mice were euthanized followed by dissection. Tissues of interest
were dissected, weighed, and measured for radioactivity in a γ-counter
as described above. For each ligand, two mice from the 24 h groups
underwent repeated μSPECT/CT and NIRF imaging (2, 4 and 24 h
p.i.). During imaging, the mice were anesthetized with 2.5% isoflurane
inhalation anesthesia and kept warm with a heating pad. Images were
acquired and analyzed as described above.
Intraperitoneal Tumor Model
LS174T-PSMA cells (1.0
× 106) in 200 μL of complete RPMI 1640 medium
were injected intraperitoneally and grew for 28 days after inoculation.
Six male BALB/c nude mice with intraperitoneally growing LS174T-PSMA
tumors were intravenously injected with 111In-labeled N50
(10 MBq and 0.3 nmol/mouse). Two hours p.i., μSPECT/CT imaging
was performed preoperatively (30 min), followed by NIRF imaging of
the mice in the supine position after surgical removal of skin, abdominal
muscle layers, and peritoneum. After in vivo image
acquisition, the visualized tumors were resected, followed by NIRF
imaging to control whether residual tumor tissue was in situ.
Statistics
Statistical analyses were performed with
GraphPad Prism, version 5.03. Results are presented as mean ±
standard deviation (SD). Differences in in vitro affinity
and tumor/organ uptake in vivo were tested for significance
using a one-way ANOVA with a Tukey multiple comparison post-test.
Differences were considered significant at p <
0.05, two-sided.
Authors: Xinning Wang; Steve S Huang; Warren D W Heston; Hong Guo; Bing-Cheng Wang; James P Basilion Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2014-09-19 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Steve S Huang; Xinning Wang; Yuqing Zhang; Aniruddha Doke; Frank P DiFilippo; Warren D Heston Journal: Prostate Date: 2014-02-24 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Kristell L S Chatalic; Sandra Heskamp; Mark Konijnenberg; Janneke D M Molkenboer-Kuenen; Gerben M Franssen; Marian C Clahsen-van Groningen; Margret Schottelius; Hans-Jürgen Wester; Wytske M van Weerden; Otto C Boerman; Marion de Jong Journal: Theranostics Date: 2016-04-12 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: Verena I Böhmer; Wiktor Szymanski; Keimpe-Oeds van den Berg; Chantal Mulder; Piermichele Kobauri; Hugo Helbert; Dion van der Born; Friederike Reeβing; Anja Huizing; Marten Klopstra; Douwe F Samplonius; Ines F Antunes; Jürgen W A Sijbesma; Gert Luurtsema; Wijnand Helfrich; Ton J Visser; Ben L Feringa; Philip H Elsinga Journal: Chemistry Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 5.236
Authors: Martina Wirtz; Alexander Schmidt; Margret Schottelius; Stephanie Robu; Thomas Günther; Markus Schwaiger; Hans-Jürgen Wester Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2018-08-22 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Susanne Lütje; Sandra Heskamp; Gerben M Franssen; Cathelijne Frielink; Annemarie Kip; Marlène Hekman; Giulio Fracasso; Marco Colombatti; Ken Herrmann; Otto C Boerman; Martin Gotthardt; Mark Rijpkema Journal: Theranostics Date: 2019-05-04 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: Yvonne H W Derks; Dennis W P M Löwik; J P Michiel Sedelaar; Martin Gotthardt; Otto C Boerman; Mark Rijpkema; Susanne Lütje; Sandra Heskamp Journal: Theranostics Date: 2019-09-20 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: Syed Muhammad Usama; Sierra C Marker; Servando Hernandez Vargas; Solmaz AghaAmiri; Sukhen C Ghosh; Naruhiko Ikoma; Hop S Tran Cao; Martin J Schnermann; Ali Azhdarinia Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-03-23 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Manja Kubeil; Irma Ivette Santana Martínez; Michael Bachmann; Klaus Kopka; Kellie L Tuck; Holger Stephan Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2022-03-31