Nuclear medicine and biology · 2023
Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE) of [64Cu]Cu and [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F (ab')2 radioimmunotherapeutic agents vs. γ-radiation for decreasing the clonogenic survival in vitro of human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) cells.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Boyle Amanda J, Cai Zhongli, O'Brien Siobhan, Crick Jennifer, Angers Stephane, Reilly Raymond M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to compare [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 and [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 radioimmunotherapy (RIT) agents for decreasing the clonogenic survival fraction (SF) in vitro of EGFR-positive human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) cell lines and estimate the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) vs. γ-radiation (XRT).
METHODS: EGFR-positive PDAC cell lines (AsPC-1, PANC-1, MIAPaCa-2, Capan-1) and EGFR-knockout PANC-1 EGFR KO cells were treated in vitro for 18 h with (0-19.65 MBq; 72 nmols/L) of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or XRT (0-8 Gy) followed by clonogenic assay. The SF was determined after culturing single treated cells for 14 d. Cell fractionation studies were performed for cells incubated with 1 MBq (72 nmols/L) of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 for 1, 4, or 24 h to estimate the time-integrated activity (Ã) on the cell surface, cytoplasm, nucleus and medium. Radiation absorbed doses in the nucleus were calculated by multiplying à by S-factors calculated by Monte Carlo N Particle (MCNP) modeling using monolayer cell culture geometry. The SF of PDAC cells was plotted vs. dose and fitted to a linear quadratic model to estimate the dose required to decrease the SF to 0.1 (D10). The D10 for RIT agents were compared to XRT to estimate the RBE. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) caused by [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 continuous exposure for 5 h or 20 h were probed by immunofluorescence for γ-H2AX. Relative EGFR expression of PDAC cells was assessed by flow cytometry (scored + to +++) and cell doubling times for untreated cells were determined.
RESULTS: The D10 for [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 9.1 Gy (PANC-1) to 39.9 Gy (Capan-1). The D10 for [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 11.7 Gy (AsPC-1) to 170.8 Gy (Capan-1). The D10 for XRT ranged from 2.5 Gy (Capan-1) to 6.7 Gy (PANC-1 EGFR KO). D10 values were not correlated with EGFR expression over a relatively narrow range (++ to +++) or with cell doubling times. Based on D10 values, PANC-1 EGFR KO cells were 1.6-fold less sensitive than PANC-1 cells to [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 and 1.9-fold less sensitive to [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2. The RBE for [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 0.06 for Capan-1 cells to 0.45 for PANC-1 cells. The RBE for [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 0.015 for Capan-1 cells to 0.28 for AsPC-1 cells. DNA DSBs were detected in PDAC cells exposed to [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 but were not correlated with the SF of the cells.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that at the same dose delivered to the cell nucleus [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 and [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 were less radiobiologically effective than XRT for decreasing the SF of human PDAC cells, but [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 was more cytotoxic than [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 except for AsPC-1 cells which were more sensitive to [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: This study demonstrates that higher radiation doses may be required for RIT than XRT to achieve radiobiologically equivalent effects when used to treat PDAC.
METHODS: EGFR-positive PDAC cell lines (AsPC-1, PANC-1, MIAPaCa-2, Capan-1) and EGFR-knockout PANC-1 EGFR KO cells were treated in vitro for 18 h with (0-19.65 MBq; 72 nmols/L) of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or XRT (0-8 Gy) followed by clonogenic assay. The SF was determined after culturing single treated cells for 14 d. Cell fractionation studies were performed for cells incubated with 1 MBq (72 nmols/L) of [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 for 1, 4, or 24 h to estimate the time-integrated activity (Ã) on the cell surface, cytoplasm, nucleus and medium. Radiation absorbed doses in the nucleus were calculated by multiplying à by S-factors calculated by Monte Carlo N Particle (MCNP) modeling using monolayer cell culture geometry. The SF of PDAC cells was plotted vs. dose and fitted to a linear quadratic model to estimate the dose required to decrease the SF to 0.1 (D10). The D10 for RIT agents were compared to XRT to estimate the RBE. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) caused by [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 continuous exposure for 5 h or 20 h were probed by immunofluorescence for γ-H2AX. Relative EGFR expression of PDAC cells was assessed by flow cytometry (scored + to +++) and cell doubling times for untreated cells were determined.
RESULTS: The D10 for [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 9.1 Gy (PANC-1) to 39.9 Gy (Capan-1). The D10 for [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 11.7 Gy (AsPC-1) to 170.8 Gy (Capan-1). The D10 for XRT ranged from 2.5 Gy (Capan-1) to 6.7 Gy (PANC-1 EGFR KO). D10 values were not correlated with EGFR expression over a relatively narrow range (++ to +++) or with cell doubling times. Based on D10 values, PANC-1 EGFR KO cells were 1.6-fold less sensitive than PANC-1 cells to [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 and 1.9-fold less sensitive to [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2. The RBE for [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 0.06 for Capan-1 cells to 0.45 for PANC-1 cells. The RBE for [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 ranged from 0.015 for Capan-1 cells to 0.28 for AsPC-1 cells. DNA DSBs were detected in PDAC cells exposed to [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 or [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 but were not correlated with the SF of the cells.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that at the same dose delivered to the cell nucleus [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 and [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 were less radiobiologically effective than XRT for decreasing the SF of human PDAC cells, but [64Cu]Cu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 was more cytotoxic than [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2 except for AsPC-1 cells which were more sensitive to [177Lu]Lu-NOTA-panitumumab F(ab')2.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: This study demonstrates that higher radiation doses may be required for RIT than XRT to achieve radiobiologically equivalent effects when used to treat PDAC.