HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wong, J. Y.C. Articles by Raubitschek, A. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wong, J. Y.C. Articles by Raubitschek, A. A.

Clinical Evaluation of Indium-111-Labeled Chimeric Anti-CEA Monoclonal Antibody

Divisions of Radiation Oncology, Radioimmunotherapy, Surgery, Radiology, Biostatistics, Pathology, Molecular Biology and Immunology, City of Hope National Medical Center and Beckman Research Institute, Duarte, California; J. W. Klinische Chemie, Universitäts-Krunkenhaiis Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Jeffrey Y. C. Wong, MD,Division of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope Medical Center, Duarte, CA 91010.

ABSTRACT

Chimeric T84.66 (cT84.66) is a high-affinity (1.16 x 10¹¹ M^–1)IgG₁ monoclonal antibody (MAb) against carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). This pilot trial evaluated the tumor-targeting properties, biodistribution, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of ¹¹¹In-labeled CT84.66. Methods: Patients with CEA-producing metastatic malignancies were administered a single intravenous dose of 5 mCi ¹¹¹In-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid-cT84.66. Serial blood samples, 24-hr urine collections and nuclear images were collected up to 7 days postinfusion. Human antichimeric antibody response was assessed up to 6 mo postinfusion. Results: Imaging of at least one known tumor site was observed in 14 of 15 (93%) patients. Seventy-four lesions were analyzed with an imaging sensitivity rate of 45.1% and a positive predictive value of 94.1%. In one patient, two additional bone metastases developed within 6 mo of antibody administration at sites initially felt to be falsely positive on scan. One patient developed a human antichimeric antibody response predominantly to the murine portion of the antibody. The antibody cleared serum with a median T_1/2, of 6.53 hr and a T_1/2ß of 90.87 hr. Interpatient variations in serum clearance rates were observed and were secondary to differences in clearance and metabolic rates of antibody-antigen complexes by the liver. One patient demonstrated very rapid clearance of antibody by the liver, which compromised antibody localization to the primary tumor. Antibody uptake in primary and metastatic tumors ranged from 0.5% to 10.5% injected dose/kg, resulting in estimated radiation doses ranging from 0.97 to 21.3 cGy/mCi ⁹⁰Y. Antibody uptake in regional lymph nodes ranged from 1.3% to 377% injected dose/kg, resulting in estimated radiation doses ranging from 2.0 to 617 cGy/mCi ⁹⁰Y. Conclusion: Chimeric T84.66 demonstrated tumor targeting that was comparable to that of other radiolabeled intact anti-CEA Mabs. Its immunogenicity after single administration was lower than murine Mabs. These properties make cT84.66 or a lower molecular weight derivative attractive for further evaluation as an imaging agent. These same properties also make it appropriate for future evaluation in Phase I therapy trials. Finally, a wide variation in the rate of antibody clearance was observed, with one patient demonstrating very slow clearance, resulting in the highest estimated marrow dose of the group, and one patient demonstrating unusually rapid clearance, resulting in poor antibody localization to tumor. Data from this study suggest that serum CEA levels, antibody-antigen complex clearance and, therefore, antibody clearance are influenced by both the production and clearance rates of CEA. This underscores the need to further identify, characterize and understand those factors that influence the biodistribution and clearance of radiolabeled anti-CEA antibodies to allow for better selection of patients for therapy and rational planning of radioimmunotherapy.

Key Words: chimeric antibody • carcinoembryonic antigen • indium-111 • radioimmunotherapy • radiolabeled antibodies

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Y. C. Wong, D. Z. Chu, L. E. Williams, D. M. Yamauchi, D. N. Ikle, C. S. Kwok, A. Liu, S. Wilczynski, D. Colcher, P. J. Yazaki, et al. Pilot Trial Evaluating an 123I-Labeled 80-Kilodalton Engineered Anticarcinoembryonic Antigen Antibody Fragment (cT84.66 Minibody) in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., August 1, 2004; 10(15): 5014 - 5021. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. Yazaki, M. A. Sherman, J. E. Shively, D. Ikle, L. E. Williams, J. Y.C. Wong, D. Colcher, A. M. Wu, and A. A. Raubitschek Humanization of the anti-CEA T84.66 antibody based on crystal structure data Protein Eng. Des. Sel., May 1, 2004; 17(5): 481 - 489. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Y. C. Wong, S. Shibata, L. E. Williams, C. S. Kwok, A. Liu, D. Z. Chu, D. M. Yamauchi, S. Wilczynski, D. N. Ikle, A. M. Wu, et al. A Phase I Trial of 90Y-Anti-Carcinoembryonic Antigen Chimeric T84.66 Radioimmunotherapy with 5-Fluorouracil in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., December 1, 2003; 9(16): 5842 - 5852. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Dadachova, A. Nakouzi, R. A. Bryan, and A. Casadevall Ionizing radiation delivered by specific antibody is therapeutic against a fungal infection PNAS, September 16, 2003; 100(19): 10942 - 10947. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Y. C. Wong, D. Z. Chu, D. M. Yamauchi, L. E. Williams, A. Liu, S. Wilczynski, A. M. Wu, J. E. Shively, J. H. Doroshow, and A. A. Raubitschek A Phase I Radioimmunotherapy Trial Evaluating 90Yttrium-labeled Anti-Carcinoembryonic Antigen (CEA) Chimeric T84.66 in Patients with Metastatic CEA-producing Malignancies Clin. Cancer Res., October 1, 2000; 6(10): 3855 - 3863. [Abstract] [Full Text]