JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


First published online January 16, 2008, 10.2967/jnumed.107.045054
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jnumed.107.045054v1
49/2/318    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JNM
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cescato, R.
Right arrow Articles by Reubi, J. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cescato, R.
Right arrow Articles by Reubi, J. C.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 49 No. 2 318-326
© 2008 by Society of Nuclear Medicine

doi: 10.2967/jnumed.107.045054

Basic Science Investigation

Bombesin Receptor Antagonists May Be Preferable to Agonists for Tumor Targeting

Renzo Cescato*,1, Theodosia Maina*,2, Berthold Nock2, Anastasia Nikolopoulou2, David Charalambidis2, Véronique Piccand1 and Jean Claude Reubi1

1 Division of Cell Biology and Experimental Cancer Research, Institute of Pathology, University of Berne, Berne, Switzerland; and 2 Molecular Radiopharmacy Section, Institute of Radioisotopes–Radiodiagnostic Products, National Center for Scientific Research Demokritos, Athens, Greece

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Jean Claude Reubi, MD, Division of Cell Biology and Experimental Cancer Research, Institute of Pathology, University of Berne, P.O. Box 62, Murtenstrasse 31, CH-3010 Berne, Switzerland. E-mail: reubi{at}pathology.unibe.ch

Two bombesin analogs, Demobesin 4 and Demobesin 1, were characterized in vitro as gastrin-releasing peptide (GRP) receptor agonist and antagonist, respectively, and were compared as 99mTc-labeled ligands for their in vitro and in vivo tumor-targeting properties. Methods: N4-[Pro1,Tyr4,Nle14]Bombesin (Demobesin 4) and N4-[D-Phe6,Leu-NHEt13,des-Met14]bombesin(6–14) (Demobesin 1) were characterized in vitro for their binding properties with GRP receptor autoradiography using GRP receptor–transfected HEK293 cells, PC3 cells, and human prostate cancer specimens. Their ability to modulate calcium mobilization in PC3 and transfected HEK293 cells was analyzed as well as their ability to trigger internalization of the GRP receptor in transfected HEK293 cells, as determined qualitatively by immunofluorescence microscopy and quantitatively by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Further, their internalization properties as 99mTc-labeled radioligands were tested in vitro in both cell lines. Finally, their biodistribution was analyzed in PC3 tumor–bearing mice. Results: A comparable binding affinity with the 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) in the nanomolar range was measured for Demobesin 4 and Demobesin 1 in all tested tissues. Demobesin 4 behaved as an agonist by strongly stimulating calcium mobilization and by triggering GRP receptor internalization. Demobesin 1 was ineffective in stimulating calcium mobilization and in triggering GRP receptor internalization. However, in these assays, it behaved as a competitive antagonist as it reversed completely the agonist-induced effects in both systems. 99mTc-Labeled Demobesin 1 was only weakly taken up by PC3 cells or GRP receptor–transfected HEK293 cells (10% and 5%, respectively, of total added radioactivity) compared with 99mTc-labeled Demobesin 4 (45% of total added radioactivity in both cell lines). Remarkably, the biodistribution study revealed a much more pronounced uptake at 1, 4, and 24 h after injection of 99mTc-labeled Demobesin 1 in vivo into PC3 tumors than 99mTc-labeled Demobesin 4. In vivo competition experiments demonstrated a specific uptake in PC3 tumors and in physiologic GRP receptor–expressing tissues. The tumor-to-kidney ratios were 0.7 for Demobesin 4 and 5.2 for Demobesin 1 at 4 h. Conclusion: This comparative in vitro/in vivo study with Demobesin 1 and Demobesin 4 indicates that GRP receptor antagonists may be superior targeting agents to GRP receptor agonists, suggesting a change of paradigm in the field of bombesin radiopharmaceuticals.

Key Words: tumor targeting • gastrin-releasing peptide receptors • antagonist • bombesin • peptide radiopharmaceuticals

* Contributed equally to this work.

COPYRIGHT © 2008 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.


Related articles in JNM:

This Month in JNM

JNM 2008 49: 11A-12A. [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JNMHome page
J. C. Reubi and H. R. Maecke
Peptide-Based Probes for Cancer Imaging
J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2008; 49(11): 1735 - 1738.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 2008 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.