Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Continuing Education
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Continuing Education
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
OtherInvited Perspectives

Auger Electrons: Lethal, Low Energy, and Coming Soon to a Tumor Cell Nucleus Near You

C. Andrew Boswell and Martin W. Brechbiel
Journal of Nuclear Medicine December 2005, 46 (12) 1946-1947;
C. Andrew Boswell
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Martin W. Brechbiel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Radiopharmaceuticals labeled with low-energy electron emitters have several key advantages over traditional agents that emit higher-energy particles. Sadly, the majority of such agents described in the literature to date have harnessed only a small percentage of the actual cytotoxic potential of Auger-emitting radionuclides because of poor design. Rather than specifically trafficking to the tumor cell nucleus, a requirement for optimal cytotoxicity, the vast majority of Auger emitter–labeled peptides reported thus far have achieved nuclear localization only after receptor-mediated endocytosis, lysosomal degradation, and “residualization” of metal radionuclides into the cell nucleus. Given the current status of molecular biology, this strategy seems rather crude, akin to tossing a message in a bottle into the sea and hoping it finds its way to the intended recipient. The article by Ginj et al. in this issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine (1) introduces a refreshing alternative and advance over traditional Auger-emitting peptide conjugates in the form of a new class of trifunctional somatostatin analogs that are not only transported into the desired tumor cell but are also further transported into the nucleus where Auger electrons are most lethal.

Auger electrons are extremely low-energy atomic orbital electrons that are emitted as an alternative to x-ray emission after electron capture, a form of β−-decay (2,3). Auger electron therapy is a useful strategy for specific tumor cell killing with a low level of damage to surrounding cells, originating from subcellular (nanometer) ranges and highly localized energy deposition (106–109 cGy) in an extremely small volume (several cubic nanometers) around the decay site (4). Auger electron emitters produce an array of reactive radicals (e.g., OH·, H·, e−aq, etc.) similar to α-emitters, which are regarded as the classical form of high linear-energy-transfer (high-LET) radiation. The estimated absorbed dose rate at the center of a cell delivered by 99mTc, 123I, 111In, 67Ga, and 201Tl is, respectively, 94, 21, 18, 74, and 76 times higher if the radioactivity is localized within the nucleus versus being on the cell membrane (5).

Several therapeutic agents containing Auger-emitting isotopes have been studied, including the somatostatin analog, octreotide, labeled with 111In via the chelator diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) (Octreoscan [111In-pentetreotide; Mallinkrodt]). Binding of this peptide to specific cell-surface receptors prompts internalization of the ligand–receptor complex via invagination of the plasma membrane, a process known as receptor-mediated endocytosis. The resulting endosomes rapidly acidify, causing dissociation of the ligand from the receptor, and [111In-DTPA]octreotide is metabolized therein to 111In-DTPA-d-Phe (6). Assuming no metal complex dissociation, this radiolabeled metabolite should be retained inside the lysosomes. However, partial translocation of 111In to the perinuclear area and into the nucleus after internalization of [111In-DTPA-d-Phe]octreotide has been reported (7), suggesting migration of 111In to the cell nucleus via an unknown biochemical mechanism. In vitro studies using [111In-DTPA]octreotide have revealed that the therapeutic effect of 111In is indeed dependent on internalization (8) but did not account for possible trafficking of the radiometal to the nucleus.

There have been similar reports of other radiometals “leaking” from peptide conjugates and subsequently migrating to the nucleus. In an attempt to rationalize higher observed therapeutic effects for somatostatin analogs labeled with the Auger-emitting isotope 64Cu relative to the corresponding 111In-labeled peptides, Wang et al. found a 3-fold higher amount of 64Cu relative to 111In localized to the nucleus of tumor cells after incubation of [64Cu-TETA]octreotide (TETA is 1,4,8,11-tetraazacyclotetradecane-N,N′,N′′,N‴′′-tetraacetic acid) and [111In-DTPA]octreotide, respectively (9). This difference in nuclear uptake may be attributed to higher in vivo stability of the 111In-DTPA complex relative to 64Cu-TETA.

In addition to the difficulties in assessing potential levels of intracellular radiometal transchelation and trafficking to the nucleus, there exists a second source of complexity surrounding the biologic effects of Auger electrons. The “bystander effect” is a phenomenon wherein radiobiologically damaged cells induce cell death in nonirradiated cells through the release of cytokines and free radicals (10). For example, Reilly and coworkers demonstrated strong antitumor effects against breast cancer xenografts using 111In-DTPA-hEGF (hEGF is human epidermal growth factor), an agent previously shown to rapidly internalize into EGF receptor–positive cells (11,12). Radiotherapeutic effects exceeded microdosimetry estimates and this inconsistency was partially attributed to the bystander effect. However, in vitro experiments revealed that 111In radioactivity localized into the cell nucleus, suggesting a trafficking mechanism. As a result, it is challenging to deconvolute the possible influences of both the trafficking and bystander phenomena versus the observed radiotherapeutic effects.

Targeted radiotherapy of somatostatin-positive tumors has also been widely investigated using peptides labeled with β−-emitting radionuclides such as 90Y and 177Lu. When coupled to octreotide, 177Lu shows great promise for therapy of small, metastatic tumors with less renal toxicity as compared with 90Y-labeled somatostatin analogs (13–15). The longer range of β−-particles from 90Y, typically 1–10 mm, results in irradiation of neighboring receptor-negative tumor cells as well as potentially normal cells by “crossfire”—a term used to describe the deposition of energy from a radionuclide in a particular tissue into a distant target. For this reason, lower-energy β−-emitters such as 177Lu and very low-energy Auger electron–emitting radiopharmaceuticals offer distinct advantages for treating much smaller lesions and micrometastases because of their much shorter ranges in tissue. A successful 177Lu/90Y combination radionuclide therapy has already been reported (16); therefore, adding a nuclear-targeted peptide labeled with an Auger emitter could even further enhance these results. One may envision that the addition of 111In to the combination of 177Lu- and 90Y-labeled octreotide could conceivably reach an even broader spectrum of tumor burden, from relatively large tumors to the smallest micrometastases.

In a revealing study, Behr et al. directly compared the therapeutic effects of an internalizing monoclonal antibody labeled with 125I, 131I, 111In, or 90Y (17). Both Auger emitters (125I and 111In) showed better therapeutic results than the β−-emitters. In addition, a trend toward better therapeutic results with the radiometals compared with radioiodine was demonstrated. The latter finding can be rationalized by the fact that radiometals attached to antibodies are residualized intracellularly. In contrast, radioiodinated antibodies undergo lysosomal degradation to mono- or diiodotyrosine that is rapidly released from cells.

In this issue, Ginj et al. introduce a more robust approach: specifically targeting the Auger-emitting isotope, 111In, into the nuclei of tumor cells in a controlled manner to ensure rapid nuclear localization of high levels of intact 111In-labeled peptide (1). To our knowledge, this is the first reported targeted peptide radiopharmaceutical rationally designed to deliver therapeutic Auger electrons to tumor cell nuclei. The demonstrated ability of this agent to achieve selective cytotoxicity for micrometastatic tumor burden in an animal model is anxiously awaited.

However, one might predict even further dramatic improvements through combining this agent with a low-energy β−-emitter such as 177Lu. Assuming no saturation of entry through nuclear pores, both 177Lu- and 111In-labeled octreotide conjugates could be targeted to the nucleus to reap the therapeutic benefits of increased tumor cell retention of both isotopes. Both local and bystander effects of the Auger emitter 111In would act in synergy with the extended range of 177Lu. For larger tumor burdens, one might even choose to include 90Y in this cocktail because of the longer range of this higher-energy β−-emitter.

In an Invited Commentary in a 2003 issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine, Kassis posed the question “Cancer Therapy with Auger Electrons: Are We Almost There?” (18). It seems that we have yet to reach “there” as the therapeutic success of this new class of trifunctional molecules in tumor-bearing animal models remains to be established. Likewise, it is unclear how general the nuclear localization signal and aminohexanoic linker strategies will prove to be when applied to other targeting vectors. Nevertheless, the development of a somatostatin derivative that is localized to and retained within the interior of tumor cell nuclei is certainly a welcome and long overdue step in the right direction.

Footnotes

  • Received Sep. 2, 2005; revision accepted Sep. 16, 2005.

    For correspondence or reprints contact: Martin W. Brechbiel, PhD, Radioimmune & Inorganic Chemistry Section, ROB, CCR, NCI, Bldg. 10, Room 1B40, 10 Center Dr., Bethesda, MD 20892-1088.

    E-mail: martinwb{at}box-m.nih.gov

    See page 2097

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    Ginj M, Hinni K, Tschumi S, Schulz S, Maecke HR. Trifunctional somatostatin-based derivatives designed for targeted radiotherapy using Auger electron emitters. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:2097–2103.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Kassis AI, Sastry KSR, Adelstein SJ. Kinetics of uptake, retention, and radiotoxicity of I-125 UDR in mammalian cells: implications of localized energy deposition by Auger processes. Radiat Res. 1987;109:78–89.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Kassis AI. The amazing world of Auger electrons. Int J Radiat Biol. 2004;80:789–803.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    Goddu SM, Rao DV, Howell RW. Multicellular dosimetry for micrometastases: dependence of self-dose versus cross-dose to cell nuclei on type and energy of radiation and subcellular distribution of radionuclides. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:521–530.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    Faraggi M, Gardin I, de Labriolle-Vaylet C, Moretti JL, Bok BD. The influence of tracer localization on the electron dose rate delivered to the cell nucleus. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:113–119.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    Bass LA, Lanahan MV, Duncan JR. Identification of the soluble in vivo metabolites of indium-111-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid-D-Phe1-octreotide. Bioconjug Chem. 1998;9:192–200.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    Janson ET, Westlin JE, Ohrvall U, Oberg K, Lukinius A. Nuclear localization of 111In after intravenous injection of [111In-DTPA-D-Phe1]-octreotide in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1514–1518.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    Capello A, Krenning EP, Breeman WAP, Bernard BF, de Jong M. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy in vitro using [111In-DTPA0]octreotide. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:98–104.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    Wang M, Caruano AL, Lewis MR, Meyer LA, VanderWaal RP, Anderson CJ. Subcellular localization of radiolabeled somatostatin analogues: implications for targeted radiotherapy of cancer. Cancer Res. 2003;63:6864–6869.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Kassis AI. In vivo validation of the bystander effect. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2004;23:71–73.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    Chen P, Cameron R, Wang J, Vallis KA, Reilly RM. Antitumor effects and normal tissue toxicity of 111In-labeled epidermal growth factor administered to athymic mice bearing epidermal growth factor receptor-positive human breast cancer xenografts. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1469–1478.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    Reilly RM, Kiarash R, Cameron R, et al. 111In-Labeled epidermal growth factor is selectively radiotoxic to human breast cancer cells overexpressing epidermal growth factor receptor. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:429–438.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    Lewis JS, Wang M, Laforest R, et al. Toxicity and dosimetry of 177Lu-DOTA-Y3-octreotate in a rat model. Int J Cancer. 2001;94:873–877.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. Kwekkeboom DJ, Bakker WH, Kooij PPM, et al. [177Lu-DOTA0,Tyr3]octreotate: comparison with [111In-DTPA0]octreotide in patients. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:1319–1325.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    Kwekkeboom DJ, Bakker WH, Kam BL, et al. Treatment of patients with gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) tumours with the novel radiolabelled somatostatin analogue [177Lu-DOTA0,Tyr3]octreotate. Eur J Nucl Med. 2003;30:417–422.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    de Jong M, Breeman WAP, Valkema R, Bernard BF, Krenning EP. Combination radionuclide therapy using Lu-177- and Y-90-labeled somatostatin analogs. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(suppl 1):13S–17S.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Behr TM, Behe M, Lohr M, et al. Therapeutic advantages of Auger electron- over β-emitting radiometals or radioiodine when conjugated to internalizing antibodies. Eur J Nucl Med. 2000;27:753–765.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    Kassis AI. Cancer therapy with Auger electrons: are we almost there? J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1479–1481.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 46 (12)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 46, Issue 12
December 1, 2005
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Auger Electrons: Lethal, Low Energy, and Coming Soon to a Tumor Cell Nucleus Near You
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Auger Electrons: Lethal, Low Energy, and Coming Soon to a Tumor Cell Nucleus Near You
C. Andrew Boswell, Martin W. Brechbiel
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Dec 2005, 46 (12) 1946-1947;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Auger Electrons: Lethal, Low Energy, and Coming Soon to a Tumor Cell Nucleus Near You
C. Andrew Boswell, Martin W. Brechbiel
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Dec 2005, 46 (12) 1946-1947;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • THIS MONTH IN JNM
  • Trifunctional Somatostatin-Based Derivatives Designed for Targeted Radiotherapy Using Auger Electron Emitters
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Nanoconjugation of PSMA-Targeting Ligands Enhances Perinuclear Localization and Improves Efficacy of Delivered Alpha-Particle Emitters against Tumor Endothelial Analogues
  • The Role of p53 in Combination Radioimmunotherapy with 64Cu-DOTA-Cetuximab and Cisplatin in a Mouse Model of Colorectal Cancer
  • Antitumor Effects and Normal-Tissue Toxicity of 111In-Nuclear Localization Sequence-Trastuzumab in Athymic Mice Bearing HER-Positive Human Breast Cancer Xenografts
  • Trastuzumab-Resistant Breast Cancer Cells Remain Sensitive to the Auger Electron-Emitting Radiotherapeutic Agent 111In-NLS-Trastuzumab and Are Radiosensitized by Methotrexate
  • 111In-Labeled Trastuzumab (Herceptin) Modified with Nuclear Localization Sequences (NLS): An Auger Electron-Emitting Radiotherapeutic Agent for HER2/neu-Amplified Breast Cancer
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Could FAP-Targeted Molecular Imaging Replace 18F-FDG for Standard-of-Care Oncologic PET?
  • Tau PET Visual Reads: Research and Clinical Applications and Future Directions
  • Radiomics in PET/CT: More Than Meets the Eye?
Show more Invited Perspectives

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2023 Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Powered by HighWire