COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Quantitative analysis and comparison study of [18F]AlF-NOTA-PRGD2, [18F]FPPRGD2 and [68Ga]Ga-NOTA-PRGD2 using a reference tissue model

Ning Guo, Lixin Lang, Weihua Li, Dale O Kiesewetter, Haokao Gao, Gang Niu, Qingguo Xie, Xiaoyuan Chen
PloS One 2012, 7 (5): e37506
22624041
With favorable pharmacokinetics and binding affinity for α(v)β(3) integrin, (18)F-labeled dimeric cyclic RGD peptide ([(18)F]FPPRGD2) has been intensively used as a PET imaging probe for lesion detection and therapy response monitoring. A recently introduced kit formulation method, which uses an (18)F-fluoride-aluminum complex labeled RGD tracer ([(18)F]AlF-NOTA-PRGD2), provides a strategy for simplifying the labeling procedure to facilitate clinical translation. Meanwhile, an easy-to-prepare (68)Ga-labeled NOTA-PRGD2 has also been reported to have promising properties for imaging integrin α(v)β(3). The purpose of this study is to quantitatively compare the pharmacokinetic parameters of [(18)F]FPPRGD2, [(18)F]AlF-NOTA-PRGD2, and [(68)Ga]Ga-NOTA-PRGD2. U87MG tumor-bearing mice underwent 60-min dynamic PET scans following the injection of three tracers. Kinetic parameters were calculated using Logan graphical analysis with reference tissue. Parametric maps were generated using voxel-level modeling. All three compounds showed high binding potential (Bp(ND) = k(3)/k(4)) in tumor voxels. [(18)F]AlF-NOTA-PRGD2 showed comparable Bp(ND) value (3.75±0.65) with those of [(18)F]FPPRGD2 (3.39±0.84) and [(68)Ga]Ga-NOTA-PRGD2 (3.09±0.21) (p>0.05). Little difference was found in volume of distribution (V(T)) among these three RGD tracers in tumor, liver and muscle. Parametric maps showed similar kinetic parameters for all three tracers. We also demonstrated that the impact of non-specific binding could be eliminated in the kinetic analysis. Consequently, kinetic parameter estimation showed more comparable results among groups than static image analysis. In conclusion, [(18)F]AlF-NOTA-PRGD2 and [(68)Ga]Ga-NOTA-PRGD2 have comparable pharmacokinetics and quantitative parameters compared to those of [(18)F]FPPRGD2. Despite the apparent difference in tumor uptake (%ID/g determined from static images) and clearance pattern, the actual specific binding component extrapolated from kinetic modeling appears to be comparable for all three dimeric RGD tracers.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
22624041
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"