Cargando…

Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors

PURPOSE: Radical resection is paramount for curative oncological surgery. Fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) aids in intraoperative identification of tumor-positive resection margins. This study aims to assess the feasibility of urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) targeting antibody fragm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Baart, Victor M., van Manen, Labrinus, Bhairosingh, Shadhvi S., Vuijk, Floris A., Iamele, Luisa, de Jonge, Hugo, Scotti, Claudia, Resnati, Massimo, Cordfunke, Robert A., Kuppen, Peter J. K., Mazar, Andrew P., Burggraaf, Jacobus, Vahrmeijer, Alexander L., Sier, Cornelis F. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9970952/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34642899
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11307-021-01657-2
_version_ 1784898006845227008
author Baart, Victor M.
van Manen, Labrinus
Bhairosingh, Shadhvi S.
Vuijk, Floris A.
Iamele, Luisa
de Jonge, Hugo
Scotti, Claudia
Resnati, Massimo
Cordfunke, Robert A.
Kuppen, Peter J. K.
Mazar, Andrew P.
Burggraaf, Jacobus
Vahrmeijer, Alexander L.
Sier, Cornelis F. M.
author_facet Baart, Victor M.
van Manen, Labrinus
Bhairosingh, Shadhvi S.
Vuijk, Floris A.
Iamele, Luisa
de Jonge, Hugo
Scotti, Claudia
Resnati, Massimo
Cordfunke, Robert A.
Kuppen, Peter J. K.
Mazar, Andrew P.
Burggraaf, Jacobus
Vahrmeijer, Alexander L.
Sier, Cornelis F. M.
author_sort Baart, Victor M.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Radical resection is paramount for curative oncological surgery. Fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) aids in intraoperative identification of tumor-positive resection margins. This study aims to assess the feasibility of urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) targeting antibody fragments for FGS in a direct comparison with their parent IgG in various relevant in vivo models. PROCEDURES: Humanized anti-uPAR monoclonal antibody MNPR-101 (uIgG) was proteolytically digested into F(ab’)2 and Fab fragments named uFab2 and uFab. Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) and cell assays were used to determine in vitro binding before and after fluorescent labeling with IRDye800CW. Mice bearing subcutaneous HT-29 human colonic cancer cells were imaged serially for up to 120 h after fluorescent tracer administration. Imaging characteristics and ex vivo organ biodistribution were further compared in orthotopic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BxPc-3-luc2), head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (OSC-19-luc2-GFP), and peritoneal carcinomatosis (HT29-luc2) models using the clinical Artemis fluorescence imaging system. RESULTS: Unconjugated and conjugated uIgG, uFab2, and uFab specifically recognized uPAR in the nanomolar range as determined by SPR and cell assays. Subcutaneous tumors were clearly identifiable with tumor-to-background ratios (TBRs) > 2 after 72 h for uIgG-800F and 24 h for uFab2-800F and uFab-800F. For the latter two, mean fluorescence intensities (MFIs) dipped below predetermined threshold after 72 h and 36 h, respectively. Tumors were easily identified in the orthotopic models with uIgG-800F consistently having the highest MFIs and uFab2-800F and uFab-800F having similar values. In biodistribution studies, kidney and liver fluorescence approached tumor fluorescence after uIgG-800F administration and surpassed tumor fluorescence after uFab2-800F or uFab-800F administration, resulting in interference in the abdominal orthotopic mouse models. CONCLUSIONS: In a side-by-side comparison, FGS with uPAR-targeting antibody fragments compared with the parent IgG resulted in earlier tumor visualization at the expense of peak fluorescence intensity. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11307-021-01657-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9970952
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99709522023-03-01 Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors Baart, Victor M. van Manen, Labrinus Bhairosingh, Shadhvi S. Vuijk, Floris A. Iamele, Luisa de Jonge, Hugo Scotti, Claudia Resnati, Massimo Cordfunke, Robert A. Kuppen, Peter J. K. Mazar, Andrew P. Burggraaf, Jacobus Vahrmeijer, Alexander L. Sier, Cornelis F. M. Mol Imaging Biol Research Article PURPOSE: Radical resection is paramount for curative oncological surgery. Fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) aids in intraoperative identification of tumor-positive resection margins. This study aims to assess the feasibility of urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) targeting antibody fragments for FGS in a direct comparison with their parent IgG in various relevant in vivo models. PROCEDURES: Humanized anti-uPAR monoclonal antibody MNPR-101 (uIgG) was proteolytically digested into F(ab’)2 and Fab fragments named uFab2 and uFab. Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) and cell assays were used to determine in vitro binding before and after fluorescent labeling with IRDye800CW. Mice bearing subcutaneous HT-29 human colonic cancer cells were imaged serially for up to 120 h after fluorescent tracer administration. Imaging characteristics and ex vivo organ biodistribution were further compared in orthotopic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BxPc-3-luc2), head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (OSC-19-luc2-GFP), and peritoneal carcinomatosis (HT29-luc2) models using the clinical Artemis fluorescence imaging system. RESULTS: Unconjugated and conjugated uIgG, uFab2, and uFab specifically recognized uPAR in the nanomolar range as determined by SPR and cell assays. Subcutaneous tumors were clearly identifiable with tumor-to-background ratios (TBRs) > 2 after 72 h for uIgG-800F and 24 h for uFab2-800F and uFab-800F. For the latter two, mean fluorescence intensities (MFIs) dipped below predetermined threshold after 72 h and 36 h, respectively. Tumors were easily identified in the orthotopic models with uIgG-800F consistently having the highest MFIs and uFab2-800F and uFab-800F having similar values. In biodistribution studies, kidney and liver fluorescence approached tumor fluorescence after uIgG-800F administration and surpassed tumor fluorescence after uFab2-800F or uFab-800F administration, resulting in interference in the abdominal orthotopic mouse models. CONCLUSIONS: In a side-by-side comparison, FGS with uPAR-targeting antibody fragments compared with the parent IgG resulted in earlier tumor visualization at the expense of peak fluorescence intensity. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11307-021-01657-2. Springer International Publishing 2021-10-12 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9970952/ /pubmed/34642899 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11307-021-01657-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research Article
Baart, Victor M.
van Manen, Labrinus
Bhairosingh, Shadhvi S.
Vuijk, Floris A.
Iamele, Luisa
de Jonge, Hugo
Scotti, Claudia
Resnati, Massimo
Cordfunke, Robert A.
Kuppen, Peter J. K.
Mazar, Andrew P.
Burggraaf, Jacobus
Vahrmeijer, Alexander L.
Sier, Cornelis F. M.
Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors
title Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors
title_full Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors
title_fullStr Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors
title_full_unstemmed Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors
title_short Side-by-Side Comparison of uPAR-Targeting Optical Imaging Antibodies and Antibody Fragments for Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Solid Tumors
title_sort side-by-side comparison of upar-targeting optical imaging antibodies and antibody fragments for fluorescence-guided surgery of solid tumors
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9970952/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34642899
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11307-021-01657-2
work_keys_str_mv AT baartvictorm sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT vanmanenlabrinus sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT bhairosinghshadhvis sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT vuijkflorisa sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT iameleluisa sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT dejongehugo sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT scotticlaudia sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT resnatimassimo sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT cordfunkeroberta sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT kuppenpeterjk sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT mazarandrewp sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT burggraafjacobus sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT vahrmeijeralexanderl sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors
AT siercornelisfm sidebysidecomparisonofupartargetingopticalimagingantibodiesandantibodyfragmentsforfluorescenceguidedsurgeryofsolidtumors