Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

[68Ga]RGD Versus [18F]FDG PET Imaging in Monitoring Treatment Response of a Mouse Model of Human Glioblastoma Tumor with Bevacizumab and/or Temozolomide

  • Published:
Molecular Imaging and Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with [68Ga]NODAGA-c(RGDfK) ([68Ga]RGD), in comparison with 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG), for early monitoring of the efficacy of an antiangiogenic agent associated or not with chemotherapy, in a mouse model of glioblastoma (GB).

Procedures

Mice bearing U87MG human GB cells line were parted into five groups of five mice each. One group was imaged at baseline before the treatment phase; another group was treated with bevacizumab (BVZ), another group with temozolomide (TMZ), another group with both agents, and the last one was the control group. Tumors growth and biological properties were evaluated by caliper measurements and PET imaging at three time points (baseline, during treatment t1 = 4–6 days and t2 = 10–12 days). At the end of the study, tumors were counted and analyzed by immunohistochemistry (CD31 to evaluate microvessel density).

Results

The tumor volume assessed by caliper measurements was significantly greater at t1 in the control group than in the TMZ + BVZ-treated group or in the BVZ-treated group. At t2, tumor volume of all treated groups was significantly smaller than that of the control group. [18F]FDG PET failed to reflect this efficacy of treatment. In contrast, at t1, the [68Ga]RGD tumor uptake was concordant with tumor growth in controls and in treated groups. At t2, a significant increase in tumor uptake of [68Ga]RGD vs. t1 was only observed in the TMZ-treated group, reflecting a lack of angiogenesis inhibition, whereas TMZ + BVZ resulted in a dramatic tumor arrest, reduction in microvessel density and stable tumor [68Ga]RGD uptake.

Conclusions

[68Ga]RGD is a useful PET agent for in vivo angiogenesis imaging and can be useful for monitoring antiangiogenic treatment associated or not with chemotherapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Carmeliet P, Jain RK (2000) Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature 407:249–257

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Folkman J (1971) Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med 285:1182–1186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Folkman J (2007) Angiogenesis: an organizing principle for drug discovery? Nat Rev Drug Discov 6:273–286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Folkman J (2007) Is angiogenesis an organizing principle in biology and medicine? J Pediatr Surg 42:1–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ivy SP, Wick JY, Kaufman BM (2009) An overview of small-molecule inhibitors of VEGFR signaling. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 6:569–579

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tarallo V, De Falco S (2015) The vascular endothelial growth factors and receptors family: up to now the only target for anti-angiogenesis therapy. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 64:185–189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bellou S, Pentheroudakis G, Murphy C, Fotsis T (2013) Anti-angiogenesis in cancer therapy: Hercules and hydra. Cancer Lett 338:219–228

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sennino B, McDonald DM (2012) Controlling escape from angiogenesis inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer 12:699–709

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Scott BJ, Quant EC, McNamara MB, Ryg PA, Batchelor TT, Wen PY (2010) Bevacizumab salvage therapy following progression in high-grade glioma patients treated with VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Neuro-Oncology 12:603–607

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Ye W (2016) The complexity of translating anti-angiogenesis therapy from basic science to the clinic. Dev Cell 37:114–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Colavolpe C, Chinot O, Metellus P, Mancini J, Barrie M, Bequet-Boucard C, Tabouret E, Mundler O, Figarella-Branger D, Guedj E (2012) FDG-PET predicts survival in recurrent high-grade gliomas treated with bevacizumab and irinotecan. Neuro-Oncology 14:649–657

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Goggi JL, Bejot R, Moonshi SS, Bhakoo KK (2013) Stratification of 18F-labeled PET imaging agents for the assessment of antiangiogenic therapy responses in tumors. J Nucl Med 54:1630–1636

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bao X, Wang MW, Luo JM, Wang SY, Zhang YP, Zhang YJ (2016) Optimization of early response monitoring and prediction of cancer antiangiogenesis therapy via noninvasive PET molecular imaging strategies of multifactorial bioparameters. Theranostics 6:2084–2098

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Corroyer-Dulmont A, Peres EA, Gerault AN, Savina A, Bouquet F, Divoux D, Toutain J, Ibazizène M, MacKenzie ET, Barré L, Bernaudin M, Petit E, Valable S (2016) Multimodal imaging based on MRI and PET reveals [18F]FLT PET as a specific and early indicator of treatment efficacy in a preclinical model of recurrent glioblastoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:682–694

  15. Sheldrake HM, Patterson LH (2009) Function and antagonism of beta3 integrins in the development of cancer therapy. Curr Cancer Drug Targets 9:519–540

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Desgrosellier JS, Cheresh DA (2010) Integrins in cancer: biological implications and therapeutic opportunities. Nat Rev Cancer 10:9–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Gaertner FC, Souvatzoglou M, Brix G, Beer AJ (2012) Imaging of hypoxia using PET and MRI. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 13:552–570

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Niu G, Chen X (2016) RGD PET: from lesion detection to therapy response monitoring. J Nucl Med 57:501–502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhang H, Liu N, Gao S, Hu X, Zhao W, Tao R, Chen Z, Zheng J, Sun X, Xu L, Li W, Yu J, Yuan S (2016) Can an 18F-ALF-NOTA-PRGD2 PET/CT scan predict treatment sensitivity to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma? J Nucl Med 57:524–529

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Iagaru A, Mosci C, Mittra E, Zaharchuk G, Fischbein N, Harsh G, Li G, Nagpal S, Recht L, Gambhir SS (2015) Glioblastoma multiforme recurrence: an exploratory study of 18F FPPRGD2 PET/CT. Radiology 277:497–506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bozon-Petitprin A, Bacot S, Gauchez AS, Ahmadi M, Bourre JC, Marti-Batlle D, Perret P, Broisat A, Riou LM, Claron M, Boturyn D, Fagret D, Ghezzi C, Vuillez JP (2015) Targeted radionuclide therapy with RAFT-RGD radiolabelled with 90Y or 177Lu in a mouse model of αvβ3-expressing tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:252–263

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Guo N, Zhang F, Zhang X, Guo J, Lang L, Kiesewetter DO, Niu G, Li Q, Chen X (2015) Quantitative evaluation of tumor early response to a vascular-disrupting agent with dynamic PET. Mol Imaging Biol 17:865–873

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Cui Y, Liu H, Liang S, Zhang C, Cheng W, Hai W, Yin B, Wang D (2016) The feasibility of 18F-AlF-NOTA-PRGD2 PET/CT for monitoring early response of Endostar antiangiogenic therapy in human nasopharyngeal carcinoma xenograft model compared with 18F-FDG. Oncotarget 7:27243–27254

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Kazmierczak PM, Todica A, Gildehaus FJ, Hirner-Eppeneder H, Brendel M, Eschbach RS, Hellmann M, Nikolaou K, Reiser MF, Wester HJ, Kropf S, Rominger A, Cyran CC (2016) 68Ga-TRAP-(RGD)3 hybrid imaging for the in vivo monitoring of αvβ3-integrin expression as biomarker of anti-angiogenic therapy effects in experimental breast cancer. PLoS One 11:e0168248

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Rylova SN, Barnucz E, Fani M, Braun F, Werner M, Lassmann S, Maecke HR, Weber WA (2014) Does imaging αvβ3 integrin expression with PET detect changes in angiogenesis during bevacizumab therapy? J Nucl Med 55:1878–1884

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Battle MR, Goggi JL, Allen L, Barnett J, Morrison MS (2011) Monitoring tumor response to antiangiogenic sunitinib therapy with 18F-fluciclatide, an 18F-labeled αvβ3-integrin and αvβ5-integrin imaging agent. J Nucl Med 52:424–430

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Eo JS, Jeong JM (2016) Angiogenesis imaging using 68Ga-RGD PET/CT: therapeutic implications. Semin Nucl Med 46:419–427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Haubner R, Maschauer S, Prante O (2014) PET radiopharmaceuticals for imaging integrin expression: tracers in clinical studies and recent developments. Biomed Res Int 2014:871609

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Knetsch PA, Petrik M, Griessinger CM, Rangger C, Fani M, Kesenheimer C, von Guggenberg E, Pichler BJ, Virgolini I, Decristoforo C, Haubner R (2011) [68Ga]NODAGA-RGD for imaging αvβ3 integrin expression. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:1303–1312

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Haubner R, Finkenstedt A, Stegmayr A, Rangger C, Decristoforo C, Zoller H, Virgolini IJ (2016) [68Ga]NODAGA-RGD—metabolic stability, biodistribution, and dosimetry data from patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and liver cirrhosis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:2005–2013

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Provost C, Prignon A, Rozenblum-Beddok L, Bruyer Q, Dumont S, Merabtene F, Nataf V, Bouteiller C, Talbot JN (2018) Comparison and evaluation of two RGD peptides labelled with 68Ga or 18F for PET imaging of angiogenesis in animal models of human glioblastoma or lung carcinoma. Oncotarget 9:19307–19316

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Frosina G (2016) Non-routine tracers for PET imaging of high-grade glioma. Anticancer Res 36:3253–3260

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kreisl TN, Smith P, Sul J, Salgado C, Iwamoto FM, Shih JH, Fine HA (2013) Continuous daily sunitinib for recurrent glioblastoma. J Neuro-Oncol 111:41–48

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Corroyer-Dulmont A, Peres EA, Petit E et al (2013) Detection of glioblastoma response to temozolomide combined with bevacizumab based on muMRI and muPET imaging reveals [18F]-fluoro-L-thymidine as an early and robust predictive marker for treatment efficacy. Neuro-Oncology 15:41–56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Omuro A, Beal K, Gutin P, Karimi S, Correa DD, Kaley TJ, DeAngelis LM, Chan TA, Gavrilovic IT, Nolan C, Hormigo A, Lassman AB, Mellinghoff I, Grommes C, Reiner AS, Panageas KS, Baser RE, Tabar V, Pentsova E, Sanchez J, Barradas-Panchal R, Zhang J, Faivre G, Brennan CW, Abrey LE, Huse JT (2014) Phase II study of bevacizumab, temozolomide, and hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Clin Cancer Res 20:5023–5031

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Huang J, Frischer JS, Serur A, Kadenhe A, Yokoi A, McCrudden KW, New T, O'Toole K, Zabski S, Rudge JS, Holash J, Yancopoulos GD, Yamashiro DJ, Kandel JJ (2003) Regression of established tumors and metastases by potent vascular endothelial growth factor blockade. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:7785–7790

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Inai T, Mancuso M, Hashizume H, Baffert F, Haskell A, Baluk P, Hu-Lowe DD, Shalinsky DR, Thurston G, Yancopoulos GD, McDonald DM (2004) Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling in cancer causes loss of endothelial fenestrations, regression of tumor vessels, and appearance of basement membrane ghosts. Am J Pathol 165:35–52

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Beal K, Abrey LE, Gutin PH (2011) Antiangiogenic agents in the treatment of recurrent or newly diagnosed glioblastoma: analysis of single-agent and combined modality approaches. Radiat Oncol 6:2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Hombach-Klonisch S, Mehrpour M, Shojaei S, Harlos C, Pitz M, Hamai A, Siemianowicz K, Likus W, Wiechec E, Toyota BD, Hoshyar R, Seyfoori A, Sepehri Z, Ande SR, Khadem F, Akbari M, Gorman AM, Samali A, Klonisch T, Ghavami S (2018) Glioblastoma and chemoresistance to alkylating agents: involvement of apoptosis, autophagy, and unfolded protein response. Pharmacol Ther 184:13-41

  40. Xue W, Du X, Wu H, Liu H, Xie T, Tong H, Chen X, Guo Y, Zhang W (2017) Aberrant glioblastoma neovascularization patterns and their correlation with DCE-MRI-derived parameters following temozolomide and bevacizumab treatment. Sci Rep 7:13894

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The study was supported by the French Association Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie (ANRT) and PETNET Solutions SAS, Siemens healthineers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire d’Imagerie Moléculaire Positonique (LIMP), UMS 28, UPMC - Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France

    Claire Provost, Laura Rozenblum-Beddok, Valérie Nataf, Aurélie Prignon & Jean-Noël Talbot

  2. Service de Médecine Nucléaire et Radiopharmacie, Hôpital Tenon, AP-HP, Paris, France

    Laura Rozenblum-Beddok, Valérie Nataf & Jean-Noël Talbot

  3. Plateforme d’Histomorphologie Service d’Anatomie Pathologique, Hôpital Saint Antoine, AP-HP, Paris, France

    Fatiha Merabtene

Authors
  1. Claire Provost
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Rozenblum-Beddok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Valérie Nataf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fatiha Merabtene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aurélie Prignon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jean-Noël Talbot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claire Provost.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Provost, C., Rozenblum-Beddok, L., Nataf, V. et al. [68Ga]RGD Versus [18F]FDG PET Imaging in Monitoring Treatment Response of a Mouse Model of Human Glioblastoma Tumor with Bevacizumab and/or Temozolomide. Mol Imaging Biol 21, 297–305 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-018-1224-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-018-1224-9

Key words

Search

Navigation