Cargando…

In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab

Introduction: [(227)Th]Th-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb, a mesothelin (MSLN)-targeted thorium-227 therapeutic conjugate, is currently in phase I clinical trial; however, direct PET imaging using this conjugate is technically challenging. Thus, using the same MSLN antibody, we synthesized 3,2-HOPO and deferoxami...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roy, Jyoti, Jagoda, Elaine M., Basuli, Falguni, Vasalatiy, Olga, Phelps, Tim E., Wong, Karen, Ton, Anita T., Hagemann, Urs B., Cuthbertson, Alan S., Cole, Patricia E., Hassan, Raffit, Choyke, Peter L., Lin, Frank I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8161658/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34014767
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cbr.2020.4492
_version_ 1783700547299180544
author Roy, Jyoti
Jagoda, Elaine M.
Basuli, Falguni
Vasalatiy, Olga
Phelps, Tim E.
Wong, Karen
Ton, Anita T.
Hagemann, Urs B.
Cuthbertson, Alan S.
Cole, Patricia E.
Hassan, Raffit
Choyke, Peter L.
Lin, Frank I.
author_facet Roy, Jyoti
Jagoda, Elaine M.
Basuli, Falguni
Vasalatiy, Olga
Phelps, Tim E.
Wong, Karen
Ton, Anita T.
Hagemann, Urs B.
Cuthbertson, Alan S.
Cole, Patricia E.
Hassan, Raffit
Choyke, Peter L.
Lin, Frank I.
author_sort Roy, Jyoti
collection PubMed
description Introduction: [(227)Th]Th-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb, a mesothelin (MSLN)-targeted thorium-227 therapeutic conjugate, is currently in phase I clinical trial; however, direct PET imaging using this conjugate is technically challenging. Thus, using the same MSLN antibody, we synthesized 3,2-HOPO and deferoxamine (DFO)-based zirconium-89 antibody conjugates, [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb and [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb, respectively, and compared them in vitro and in vivo. Methods: [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb and [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb were evaluated in vitro to determine binding affinity and immunoreactivity in HT29-MSLN and PDX (NCI-Meso16, NCI-Meso21) cells. For both the zirconium-89 conjugates, in vivo studies (biodistribution/imaging) were performed at days 1, 3, and 6, from which tissue uptake was determined. Results: Both the conjugates demonstrated a low nanomolar binding affinity for MSLN and >95% immunoreactivity. In all the three tumor types, biodistribution of [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb resulted in higher tumor uptake(15.88-28-33%ID/g) at all time points compared with [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb(7–13.07%ID/g). [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb femur uptake was always higher than [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb, and imaging results concurred with the biodistribution studies. Conclusions: Even though the conjugates exhibited a high binding affinity for MSLN, [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb showed a higher tumor and lower femur uptake than [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb. Nevertheless, [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb could be used to study organ distribution and lesion uptake with the caveat of detecting MSLN-positive bone lesions. Clinical trial (NCT03507452).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8161658
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81616582021-05-28 In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab Roy, Jyoti Jagoda, Elaine M. Basuli, Falguni Vasalatiy, Olga Phelps, Tim E. Wong, Karen Ton, Anita T. Hagemann, Urs B. Cuthbertson, Alan S. Cole, Patricia E. Hassan, Raffit Choyke, Peter L. Lin, Frank I. Cancer Biother Radiopharm Original Research Articles Introduction: [(227)Th]Th-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb, a mesothelin (MSLN)-targeted thorium-227 therapeutic conjugate, is currently in phase I clinical trial; however, direct PET imaging using this conjugate is technically challenging. Thus, using the same MSLN antibody, we synthesized 3,2-HOPO and deferoxamine (DFO)-based zirconium-89 antibody conjugates, [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb and [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb, respectively, and compared them in vitro and in vivo. Methods: [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb and [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb were evaluated in vitro to determine binding affinity and immunoreactivity in HT29-MSLN and PDX (NCI-Meso16, NCI-Meso21) cells. For both the zirconium-89 conjugates, in vivo studies (biodistribution/imaging) were performed at days 1, 3, and 6, from which tissue uptake was determined. Results: Both the conjugates demonstrated a low nanomolar binding affinity for MSLN and >95% immunoreactivity. In all the three tumor types, biodistribution of [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb resulted in higher tumor uptake(15.88-28-33%ID/g) at all time points compared with [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb(7–13.07%ID/g). [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb femur uptake was always higher than [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb, and imaging results concurred with the biodistribution studies. Conclusions: Even though the conjugates exhibited a high binding affinity for MSLN, [(89)Zr]Zr-DFO-MSLN-mAb showed a higher tumor and lower femur uptake than [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb. Nevertheless, [(89)Zr]Zr-3,2-HOPO-MSLN-mAb could be used to study organ distribution and lesion uptake with the caveat of detecting MSLN-positive bone lesions. Clinical trial (NCT03507452). Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers 2021-05-01 2021-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8161658/ /pubmed/34014767 http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cbr.2020.4492 Text en © Jyoti Roy et al. 2021; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This Open Access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License [CC-BY-NC] (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Articles
Roy, Jyoti
Jagoda, Elaine M.
Basuli, Falguni
Vasalatiy, Olga
Phelps, Tim E.
Wong, Karen
Ton, Anita T.
Hagemann, Urs B.
Cuthbertson, Alan S.
Cole, Patricia E.
Hassan, Raffit
Choyke, Peter L.
Lin, Frank I.
In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab
title In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab
title_full In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab
title_fullStr In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab
title_full_unstemmed In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab
title_short In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of 3,2-HOPO Versus Deferoxamine-Based Chelation of Zirconium-89 to the Antimesothelin Antibody Anetumab
title_sort in vitro and in vivo comparison of 3,2-hopo versus deferoxamine-based chelation of zirconium-89 to the antimesothelin antibody anetumab
topic Original Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8161658/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34014767
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cbr.2020.4492
work_keys_str_mv AT royjyoti invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT jagodaelainem invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT basulifalguni invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT vasalatiyolga invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT phelpstime invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT wongkaren invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT tonanitat invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT hagemannursb invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT cuthbertsonalans invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT colepatriciae invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT hassanraffit invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT choykepeterl invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab
AT linfranki invitroandinvivocomparisonof32hopoversusdeferoxaminebasedchelationofzirconium89totheantimesothelinantibodyanetumab