Top

Published in:

01-10-2012 | Research Article

Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Irinotecan Therapy by FDG and FLT PET/CT Imaging in a Colorectal Cancer Xenograft Model

Authors: Sarah R. Mudd, Kimberley D. Holich, Martin J. Voorbach, Todd B. Cole, David R. Reuter, Paul Tapang, Gail Bukofzer, Arunava Chakravartty, Cherrie K. Donawho, Joann P. Palma, Gerard B. Fox, Mark Day, Yanping Luo

Published in: Molecular Imaging and Biology | Issue 5/2012

Abstract

Purpose

Longitudinal changes of 3′-[¹⁸ F]fluoro-3′-deoxythymidine (FLT) and 2-deoxy-2-[¹⁸ F]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) in response to irinotecan therapy in an animal model of colorectal cancer were compared.

Procedures

SCID/CB-17 mice with HCT116 tumors were treated with 50 mg/kg irinotecan by intraperitoneal injection weekly for 3 weeks. FLT and FDG-positron emission tomography (PET) were performed at baseline, the day after each treatment, and 5 days after the first treatment. Proliferation and apoptosis were evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) after day 15 of imaging.

Results

Irinotecan treatment resulted in a suppression of tumor growth. Tumor FLT uptake was decreased the day after each treatment but to a lesser extent 5 days after the first treatment. FDG uptake increased the day after each treatment with a continuous increase throughout the experiment. IHC analysis of phospho-H3 and Ki67 confirmed FLT-PET results, indicating a decrease in proliferation the day after the final irinotecan treatment. Increased apoptosis monitored by caspase-3 was observed after day 15 with irinotecan treatment.

Conclusions

FLT-PET may be a better method than FDG-PET for assessing treatment response to irinotecan. Changes in imaging occur before changes in tumor volume.

Shields AF (2006) Positron emission tomography measurement of tumor metabolism and growth: its expanding role in oncology. Mol Imaging Biol 8(3):141–150PubMedCrossRef

Willmann JK, van Bruggen N, Dinkelborg LM, Gambhir SS (2008) Molecular imaging in drug development. Nat Rev Drug Discov 7(7):591–607PubMedCrossRef

Pien HH, Fischman AJ, Thrall JH, Sorensen AG (2005) Using imaging biomarkers to accelerate drug development and clinical trials. Drug Discov Today 10(4):259–266PubMedCrossRef

Bading JR, Shields AF (2008) Imaging of cell proliferation: status and prospects. J Nucl Med 49(Suppl 2):64S–80SPubMedCrossRef

Shields AF, Grierson JR, Dohmen BM et al (1998) Imaging proliferation in vivo with [F-18]FLT and positron emission tomography. Nat Med 4(11):1334–1336PubMedCrossRef

Rasey JS, Grierson JR, Wiens LW, Kolb PD, Schwartz JL (2002) Validation of FLT uptake as a measure of thymidine kinase-1 activity in A549 carcinoma cells. J Nucl Med 43(9):1210–1217PubMed

Seitz U, Wagner M, Neumaier B et al (2002) Evaluation of pyrimidine metabolising enzymes and in vitro uptake of 3′-[(18)F]fluoro-3′-deoxythymidine ([(18)F]FLT) in pancreatic cancer cell lines. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 29(9):1174–1181PubMedCrossRef

Been LB, Suurmeijer AJ, Cobben DC, Jager PL, Hoekstra HJ, Elsinga PH (2004) [18 F]FLT-PET in oncology: current status and opportunities. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31(12):1659–1672PubMedCrossRef

Waldherr C, Mellinghoff IK, Tran C et al (2005) Monitoring antiproliferative responses to kinase inhibitor therapy in mice with 3′-deoxy-3′-18 F-fluorothymidine PET. J Nucl Med 46(1):114–120PubMed

10.

Barthel H, Cleij MC, Collingridge DR et al (2003) 3′-Deoxy-3′-[¹⁸ F]fluorothymidine as a new marker for monitoring tumor response to antiproliferative therapy in vivo with positron emission tomography. Cancer Res 63(13):3791–3798PubMed

11.

Schiepers C, Dahlbom M, Chen W et al (2010) Kinetics of 3′-deoxy-3′-18 F-fluorothymidine during treatment monitoring of recurrent high-grade glioma. J Nucl Med 51(5):720–727PubMedCrossRef

12.

Dittmann H, Dohmen BM, Kehlbach R et al (2002) Early changes in [18 F]FLT uptake after chemotherapy: an experimental study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 29(11):1462–1469PubMedCrossRef

13.

Na YS, Jung KA, Kim SM et al (2010) The histone deacetylase inhibitor PXD101 increases the efficacy of irinotecan in in vitro and in vivo colon cancer models. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 68(2):389–398

14.

Moroz MA, Kochetkov T, Cai S et al (2011) Imaging colon cancer response following treatment with AZD1152: a preclinical analysis of [18 F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose and 3′-deoxy-3′-[18 F]fluorothymidine imaging. Clin Cancer Res 17(5):1099–1110PubMedCrossRef

15.

Leyton J, Smith G, Lees M et al (2008) Noninvasive imaging of cell proliferation following mitogenic extracellular kinase inhibition by PD0325901. Mol Cancer Ther 7(9):3112–3121PubMedCrossRef

16.

Leyton J, Alao JP, Da Costa M et al (2006) In vivo biological activity of the histone deacetylase inhibitor LAQ824 is detectable with 3′-deoxy-3′-[18 F]fluorothymidine positron emission tomography. Cancer Res 66(15):7621–7629PubMedCrossRef

17.

Weekes J, Lam AK, Sebesan S, Ho YH (2009) Irinotecan therapy and molecular targets in colorectal cancer: a systemic review. World J Gastroenterol 15(29):3597–3602PubMedCrossRef

18.

Palma JP, Wang YC, Rodriguez LE et al (2009) ABT-888 confers broad in vivo activity in combination with temozolomide in diverse tumors. Clin Cancer Res 15(23):7277–7290PubMedCrossRef

19.

Teicher BA (2002) Tumor models in cancer research, 2nd edn. Humana Press, Totowa

20.

Aide N, Poulain L, Briand M et al (2009) Early evaluation of the effects of chemotherapy with longitudinal FDG small-animal PET in human testicular cancer xenografts: early flare response does not reflect refractory disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36(3):396–405PubMedCrossRef

21.

Sharma RI, Smith TA (2008) Colorectal tumor cells treated with 5-FU, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and cetuximab exhibit changes in 18 F-FDG incorporation corresponding to hexokinase activity and glucose transport. J Nucl Med 49(8):1386–1394PubMedCrossRef

22.

Takeba Y, Sekine S, Kumai T et al (2007) Irinotecan-induced apoptosis is inhibited by increased P-glycoprotein expression and decreased p53 in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Biol Pharm Bull 30(8):1400–1406PubMedCrossRef

23.

Haberkorn U, Bellemann ME, Brix G et al (2001) Apoptosis and changes in glucose transport early after treatment of Morris hepatoma with gemcitabine. Eur J Nucl Med 28(4):418–425PubMedCrossRef

24.

Takei T, Kuge Y, Zhao S et al (2005) Enhanced apoptotic reaction correlates with suppressed tumor glucose utilization after cytotoxic chemotherapy: use of 99mTc-Annexin V, 18 F-FDG, and histologic evaluation. J Nucl Med 46(5):794–799PubMed

25.

Teicher BA (2008) Next generation topoisomerase I inhibitors: Rationale and biomarker strategies. Biochem Pharmacol 75(6):1262–1271PubMedCrossRef

26.

Olivieri G, Micheli A (1983) Mitotic delay and repair in human lymphocytes. Mutat Res 122(1):65–72PubMedCrossRef

27.

Aguda BD (1999) A quantitative analysis of the kinetics of the G(2) DNA damage checkpoint system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96(20):11352–11357PubMedCrossRef

28.

Furuta M, Hasegawa M, Hayakawa K et al (1997) Rapid rise in FDG uptake in an irradiated human tumour xenograft. Eur J Nucl Med 24(4):435–438PubMed

29.

Fishel ML, He Y, Reed AM et al (2008) Knockdown of the DNA repair and redox signaling protein Ape1/Ref-1 blocks ovarian cancer cell and tumor growth. DNA Repair (Amst) 7(2):177–186CrossRef

30.

Chen YL, Eriksson S, Chang ZF (2010) Regulation and functional contribution of thymidine kinase 1 in repair of DNA damage. J Biol Chem 285(35):27327–27335PubMedCrossRef

31.

Guichard S, Chatelut E, Lochon I, Bugat R, Mahjoubi M, Canal P (1998) Comparison of the pharmacokinetics and efficacy of irinotecan after administration by the intravenous versus intraperitoneal route in mice. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 42(2):165–170PubMedCrossRef

32.

Chen W, Delaloye S, Silverman DH et al (2007) Predicting treatment response of malignant gliomas to bevacizumab and irinotecan by imaging proliferation with [18 F] fluorothymidine positron emission tomography: a pilot study. J Clin Oncol 25(30):4714–4721PubMedCrossRef

33.

Goshen E, Davidson T, Zwas ST, Aderka D (2006) PET/CT in the evaluation of response to treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer with bevacizumab and irinotecan. Technol Cancer Res Treat 5(1):37–43PubMed

34.

El-Deiry WS, Sigman CC, Kelloff GJ (2006) Imaging and oncologic drug development. J Clin Oncol 24(20):3261–3273PubMedCrossRef

35.

Kelloff GJ, Hoffman JM, Johnson B et al (2005) Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development. Clin Cancer Res 11(8):2785–2808PubMedCrossRef

Title: Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Irinotecan Therapy by FDG and FLT PET/CT Imaging in a Colorectal Cancer Xenograft Model
Authors: Sarah R. Mudd
Kimberley D. Holich
Martin J. Voorbach
Todd B. Cole
David R. Reuter
Paul Tapang
Gail Bukofzer
Arunava Chakravartty
Cherrie K. Donawho
Joann P. Palma
Gerard B. Fox
Mark Day
Yanping Luo
Publication date: 01-10-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Molecular Imaging and Biology / Issue 5/2012
Print ISSN: 1536-1632
Electronic ISSN: 1860-2002
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-011-0529-8

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Irinotecan Therapy by FDG and FLT PET/CT Imaging in a Colorectal Cancer Xenograft Model

Abstract

Purpose

Procedures

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Procedures

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2012

Incongruity of Imaging Using Fluorescent 2-DG Conjugates Compared to 18F-FDG in Preclinical Cancer Models

Molecular Imaging to Identify the Vulnerable Plaque—From Basic Research to Clinical Practice

99mTc-labeled Rituximab for Imaging B Lymphocyte Infiltration in Inflammatory Autoimmune Disease Patients

In Vivo Quantification of Tumor Receptor Binding Potential with Dual-Reporter Molecular Imaging

Structure–Activity Relationship and Preclinical Evaluation of Carbon-11-Labeled Ammonium Salts as PET–Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Agents

Germinal Center Texture Entropy as Possible Indicator of Humoral Immune Response: Immunophysiology Viewpoint