RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Initial Clinical Results of a Novel Immuno-PET Theranostic Probe in HER2-negative Breast Cancer
JF Journal of Nuclear Medicine
JO J Nucl Med
FD Society of Nuclear Medicine
SP jnumed.119.236000
DO 10.2967/jnumed.119.236000
A1 Caroline ROUSSEAU
A1 David M Goldenberg
A1 Mathilde Colombie
A1 Jean Charles Sebille
A1 Philippe Meingan
A1 Ludovic Ferrer
A1 Pierre Baumgartner
A1 Evelyne Cerato
A1 Damien Masson
A1 Mario Campone
A1 Aurore Rauscher
A1 Vincent Fleury
A1 Catherine Labbe
A1 Alain Faivre-Chauvet
A1 Jean Sebastien Frenel
A1 Claire Toquet
A1 Jacques Barbet
A1 Robert M Sharkey
A1 Loic Campion
A1 Francoise Kraeber-Bodere
YR 2020
UL http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/early/2020/03/12/jnumed.119.236000.abstract
AB Purpose: This prospective study evaluated the imaging performance of a novel immunological pretargeting positron-emission tomorgraphy (immuno-PET) method in patients with HER2-negative, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-positive, metastatic breast cancer (BC), compared to computed tomography (CT), bone magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and 18Fluorodeoxyglucose PET (FDG-PET). Patients and Methods: Twenty-three patients underwent whole-body immuno-PET after injection of 150 MBq 68Ga-IMP288, a histamine-succinyl-glycine peptide given following initial targeting of a trivalent anti-CEA, bispecific, anti-peptide antibody. The gold standards were histology and imaging follow-up. Tumor standard uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean) were measured, and tumor burden analyzed using Total Tumor Volume (TTV) and Total Lesion Activity (TLA). Results: Total lesion sensitivity of immuno-PET and FDG-PET was 94.7% (1116/1178) and 89.6% (1056/1178), respectively. Immuno-PET had a somewhat higher sensitivity than CT and FDG-PET in lymph nodes (92.4% vs 69.7% and 89.4%, respectively) and liver metastases (97.3% vs 92.1% and 94.8%, respectively), whereas sensitivity was lower for lung metastases (48.3% vs 100% and 75.9%, respectively). Immuno-PET showed higher sensitivity than MRI and FDG-PET for bone lesions (95.8% vs 90.7% and 89.3%, respectively). In contrast to FDG-PET, immuno-PET disclosed brain metastases. Despite equivalent tumor SUVmax, SUVmean, and TTV, TLA was significantly higher with immuno-PET compared to FDG PET (P = 0.009). Conclusion: Immuno-PET using anti-CEA/anti-IMP288 bispecific antibody, followed by 68Ga-IMP288, is a potentially sensitive theranostic imaging method for HER2-negative, CEA-positive, metastatic BC patients, and warrants further research.