Guilan Hu1, Wenjia Zhu1, Yu Liu1, Yuan Wang1, Zheng Zhang1, Shikun Zhu1, Wenwen Duan2, Peipei Zhou2, Chao Fu1, Fang Li3, Li Huo4. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Beijing Key Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Diagnosis and Therapy in Nuclear Medicine, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Center for Rare Diseases Research, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 1 Shuaifuyuan, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, China. 2. Zhejiang Doer Biologics Corporation, Hangzhou, 310000, Zhejiang, China. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Beijing Key Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Diagnosis and Therapy in Nuclear Medicine, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Center for Rare Diseases Research, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 1 Shuaifuyuan, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, China. lifang@pumch.cn. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Beijing Key Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Diagnosis and Therapy in Nuclear Medicine, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Center for Rare Diseases Research, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 1 Shuaifuyuan, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, China. huoli@pumch.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Isoform 2 of claudin 18 (CLDN18.2) is overexpressed in gastric cancer and may be a promising imaging target. In this study, we constructed three anti-CLDN18.2 antibodies and compared them in preclinical experiments. METHODS: Screening from anti-CLDN18.2 nanobody library, we constructed three antibodies, anti-CLDN18.2 VHH (recombinant single-chain antibody fused with poly-histidine-tag), anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD (recombinant single-chain antibody fused fused with albumin binding domain), and anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc (recombinant single-chain antibody fused with IgG1-Fc) and radiolabeled with 89Zr. Affinity assay, in vitro stability, immunoactivity, blood pharmacokinetics, in vivo and ex vivo biodistribution study, specificity study, and immunohistochemical analysis were performed to assess these radiotracers. RESULTS: The EC50 were 12.21 nM, 2.48 nM, and 0.14 nM for anti-CLDN18.2 VHH, anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD, and anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc, respectively. 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH demonstrated the lowest tumor uptake in PET imaging. Both 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD and 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc demonstrated high tumor accumulation, with highest ID%/g of 25.78 ± 5.60 at 24 h post-injection with 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD and 49.43 ± 9.86 at 72 h post-injection with 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc. The specificity of 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc targeting CLDN18.2 was further confirmed by blocking study. The ex vivo biodistribution results were consistent with in vivo biodistribution data. For 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD, tumor uptake was 21.46 ± 1.78 ID%/g at 12 h and 13.73 ± 2.22 ID%/g at 108 h. For 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc, the tumor accumulation was 25.28 ± 3.83 ID%/g at 12 h and 40.13 ± 9.50 ID%/g at 108 h. Immunohistochemistry of the xenograft tissue revealed high and homogenous CLDN18.2 expression in CO-SNU620 tumor. CONCLUSION: Both anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD and anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc can be efficiently and stably radiolabeled with 89Zr for noninvasive imaging and quantification of CLDN18.2 expression in gastric cancer, of which 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD seems to be the optimal choice balancing tumor uptake and liver background. They can provide essential information to select patients who are likely to benefit from CLDN18.2-targeted treatment.
BACKGROUND: Isoform 2 of claudin 18 (CLDN18.2) is overexpressed in gastric cancer and may be a promising imaging target. In this study, we constructed three anti-CLDN18.2 antibodies and compared them in preclinical experiments. METHODS: Screening from anti-CLDN18.2 nanobody library, we constructed three antibodies, anti-CLDN18.2 VHH (recombinant single-chain antibody fused with poly-histidine-tag), anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD (recombinant single-chain antibody fused fused with albumin binding domain), and anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc (recombinant single-chain antibody fused with IgG1-Fc) and radiolabeled with 89Zr. Affinity assay, in vitro stability, immunoactivity, blood pharmacokinetics, in vivo and ex vivo biodistribution study, specificity study, and immunohistochemical analysis were performed to assess these radiotracers. RESULTS: The EC50 were 12.21 nM, 2.48 nM, and 0.14 nM for anti-CLDN18.2 VHH, anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD, and anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc, respectively. 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH demonstrated the lowest tumor uptake in PET imaging. Both 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD and 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc demonstrated high tumor accumulation, with highest ID%/g of 25.78 ± 5.60 at 24 h post-injection with 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD and 49.43 ± 9.86 at 72 h post-injection with 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc. The specificity of 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc targeting CLDN18.2 was further confirmed by blocking study. The ex vivo biodistribution results were consistent with in vivo biodistribution data. For 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD, tumor uptake was 21.46 ± 1.78 ID%/g at 12 h and 13.73 ± 2.22 ID%/g at 108 h. For 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc, the tumor accumulation was 25.28 ± 3.83 ID%/g at 12 h and 40.13 ± 9.50 ID%/g at 108 h. Immunohistochemistry of the xenograft tissue revealed high and homogenous CLDN18.2 expression in CO-SNU620 tumor. CONCLUSION: Both anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD and anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-Fc can be efficiently and stably radiolabeled with 89Zr for noninvasive imaging and quantification of CLDN18.2 expression in gastric cancer, of which 89Zr-anti-CLDN18.2 VHH-ABD seems to be the optimal choice balancing tumor uptake and liver background. They can provide essential information to select patients who are likely to benefit from CLDN18.2-targeted treatment.
Authors: C Pozzo; C Barone; J Szanto; E Padi; C Peschel; J Bükki; V Gorbunova; V Valvere; J Zaluski; M Biakhov; E Zuber; C Jacques; R Bugat Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Olivier Bouché; Jean Luc Raoul; Franck Bonnetain; Marc Giovannini; Pierre Luc Etienne; Gérard Lledo; Dominique Arsène; Jean Francois Paitel; Véronique Guérin-Meyer; Emmanuel Mitry; Bruno Buecher; Marie Christine Kaminsky; Jean François Seitz; Philippe Rougier; Laurent Bedenne; Chantal Milan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: U Sahin; Ö Türeci; G Manikhas; F Lordick; A Rusyn; I Vynnychenko; A Dudov; I Bazin; I Bondarenko; B Melichar; K Dhaene; K Wiechen; C Huber; D Maurus; A Arozullah; J W Park; M Schuler; S-E Al-Batran Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Ugur Sahin; Michael Koslowski; Karl Dhaene; Dirk Usener; Gunda Brandenburg; Gerhard Seitz; Christoph Huber; Ozlem Türeci Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-12-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: O Türeci; U Sahin; H Schulze-Bergkamen; Z Zvirbule; F Lordick; D Koeberle; P Thuss-Patience; T Ettrich; D Arnold; F Bassermann; S E Al-Batran; K Wiechen; K Dhaene; D Maurus; M Gold; C Huber; A Krivoshik; A Arozullah; J W Park; M Schuler Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 32.976