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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |