Noninvasive molecular imaging of the enhanced permeability and retention effect by64Cu-liposomes: In vivo correlations with68Ga-RGD, fluid pressure, diffusivity and18F-FDG

Betina Børresen, Anders Elias Hansen, Frederikke Petrine Fliedner, Jonas Rosager Henriksen, Dennis Ringkjøbing Elema, Malene Brandt-Larsen, Lotte Kellemann Kristensen, Annemarie Thuri Kristensen, Thomas Lars Andresen, Andreas Kjær*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

17 Citations (Scopus)
30 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: The accumulation of liposome encapsulated chemotherapy in solid cancers is dependent on the presence of the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with a liposome encapsulated radioisotope, such as liposome encapsulated Cu-64 (64Cu-liposome) may help to identify tumors with high lipo-some accumulation, and thereby stratify patients based on expected benefit from liposomal chemotherapy. However, intravenous administration of liposomes without a cytotoxic con-tent is complicated by the accelerated blood clearance (ABC) phenomenon for succeeding therapeutic liposome dosing. Alternative markers for assessing the tumor’s EPR level are therefore warranted. Materials and Methods: To increase our understanding of EPR variations and to ulti-mately identify an alternative marker for the EPR effect, we investigated the correlation between64Cu-liposome PET/CT (EPR effect) and68Ga-RGD PET/CT (neoangiogenesis),18F-FDG PET/CT (glycolysis), diffusion-weighted MRI (diffusivity) and interstitial fluid pressure in two experimental cancer models (CT26 and COLO 205). Results:64Cu-liposome and68Ga-RGD SUVmax displayed a significant moderate correla-tion, however, none of the other parameters evaluated displayed significant correlations. These results indicate that differences in neoangiogenesis may explain some EPR variability, however, as correlations were only moderate and not observed for SUVmean,68Ga-RGD is probably insufficient to serve as a stand-alone surrogate marker for quantifying the EPR effect and stratifying patients.

Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Nanomedicine
Volume15
Pages (from-to)8571-8581
Number of pages11
ISSN1176-9114
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020

Keywords

  • EPR effect
  • Liposome
  • Neoangiogenesis
  • Positron emission tomography

Cite this