Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pilot prospective evaluation of 18F-FPPRGD2 PET/CT in patients with cervical and ovarian cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We report the effect of antiangiogenic therapy on the biodistribution of 18F-FPPRGD2 (a surrogate biomarker of integrin αvβ3 expression), and the potential of 18F-FPPRGD2 to predict the prognosis in patients with cervical cancer and ovarian cancer in this clinical scenario.

Methods

Data from six women, age range 30 – 59 years (mean ± SD 44.0 ± 12.5 years), who had undergone a 18F-FPPRGD2 PET/CT scan and bevacizumab-containing therapy were prospectively collected and analyzed. We compared baseline 18F-FPPRGD2 and 18F-FDG uptake in the lesions and tumor-to-background (T/B) ratios. The maximum and mean 18F-FPPRGD2 standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean) were recorded for 13 normal organs, as well as in all the identified malignant lesions on the pretreatment scan and the 1-week post-treatment scan. We also measured changes in 18F-FPPRGD2 uptake from before to 1 week after treatment, and compared them to the changes in 18F-FDG uptake from before to 6 weeks after treatment. Treatment outcomes were correlated with these changes.

Results

The uptake in lesions and T/B ratio of 18F-FPPRGD2 were lower than those of 18F-FDG (SUVmax 3.7 ± 1.3 vs. 6.0 ± 1.8, P < 0.001; SUVmean 2.6 ± 0.7 vs. 4.2 ± 1.3, P < 0.001; T/B ratio based on SUVmax 2.4 ± 1.0 vs. 2.6 ± 1.0, P < 0.04; T/B ratio based on SUVmean 1.9 ± 0.6 vs. 2.4 ± 1.0, P < 0.003). One patient did not return for the follow-up scan and in another patient no lesions were identified on the pretreatment scan. 18F-FPPRGD2 uptake in lesions in the remaining four patients had significantly changed 1 week after treatment (SUVmean 3.3 ± 1.0 vs. 2.7 ± 1.0, P < 0.001), while uptake in all normal tissues analyzed was not affected by treatment. One patient with clinical disease progression had a decrease in lesional 18F-FPPRGD2 SUVmean of 1.6 % and in 18F-FDG SUVmean of 9.4 %. Two patients with a clinical complete response to treatment had decreases in lesional 18F-FPPRGD2 SUVmean of 25.2 % and 25.0 % and in 18F-FDG SUVmean of 6.1 % and 71.8 %. One patient with a clinical partial response had a decrease in lesional 18F-FPPRGD2 SUVmean of 7.9 % and in 18F-FDG SUVmean of 76.4 %.

Conclusion

This pilot study showed that 18F-FPPRGD2 and 18F-FDG provide independent information about the biology of ovarian and cervical cancers. Bevacizumab-containing therapy does not affect 18F-FPPRGD2 uptake in normal organs, but does result in statistically significant changes in lesions. In addition, 18F-FPPRGD2 may have potential for early prediction of response to such treatments. These preliminary findings have to be confirmed in larger studies.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Folkman J. Role of angiogenesis in tumor growth and metastasis. Semin Oncol. 2002;29:15–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carmeliet P, Jain RK. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature. 2000;407:249–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ebos JM, Kerbel RS. Antiangiogenic therapy: impact on invasion, disease progression, and metastasis. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2011;8:210–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Brooks PC, Clark RA, Cheresh DA. Requirement of vascular integrin alpha v beta 3 for angiogenesis. Science. 1994;264:569–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Max R, Gerritsen RR, Nooijen PT, Goodman SL, Sutter A, Keilholz U, et al. Immunohistochemical analysis of integrin alpha vbeta3 expression on tumor-associated vessels of human carcinomas. Int J Cancer. 1997;71:320–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wu WB, Peng HC, Huang TF. Disintegrin causes proteolysis of beta-cateninand apoptosis of endothelial cells. Involvement of cell-cell and cell-ECM interactions in regulating cell viability. Exp Cell Res. 2003;286:115–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Okada Y, Copeland BR, Hamann GF, Koziol JA, Cheresh DA, del Zoppo GJ. Integrin alphavbeta3 is expressed in selected microvessels after focal cerebral ischemia. Am J Pathol. 1996;149:37–44.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Eliceiri BP, Cheresh DA. Role of alpha v integrins during angiogenesis. Cancer J. 2000;6 Suppl 3:S245–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Felding-Habermann B, O’Toole TE, Smith JW, Fransvea E, Ruggeri ZM, Ginsberg MH, et al. Integrin activation controls metastasis in human breast cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98:1853–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Brooks PC, Montgomery AM, Rosenfeld M, Reisfeld RA, Hu T, Klier G, et al. Integrin alpha v beta 3 antagonists promote tumor regression by inducing apoptosis of angiogenic blood vessels. Cell. 1994;79:1157–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shannon KE, Keene JL, Settle SL, Duffin TD, Nickols MA, Westlin M, et al. Anti-metastatic properties of RGD-peptidomimetic agents S137 and S247. Clin Exp Metastasis. 2004;21:129–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Haubner R, Wester HJ. Radiolabeled tracers for imaging of tumor angiogenesis and evaluation of anti-angiogenic therapies. Curr Pharm Des. 2004;10:1439–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cai W, Chen X. Multimodality molecular imaging of tumor angiogenesis. J Nucl Med. 2008;49 Suppl 2:113S–28S.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Beer AJ, Haubner R, Sarbia M, Goebel M, Luderschmidt S, Grosu AL, et al. Positron emission tomography using [18F]Galacto-RGD identifies the level of integrin alpha(v)beta3 expression in man. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:3942–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Beer AJ, Niemeyer M, Carlsen J, Sarbia M, Nährig J, Watzlowik P, et al. Patterns of alphavbeta3 expression in primary and metastatic human breast cancer as shown by 18F-Galacto-RGD PET. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:255–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Beer AJ, Lorenzen S, Metz S, Herrmann K, Watzlowik P, Wester HJ, et al. Comparison of integrin alphaVbeta3 expression and glucose metabolism in primary and metastatic lesions in cancer patients: a PET study using 18F-galacto-RGD and 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:22–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Haubner R, Weber WA, Beer AJ, Vabuliene E, Reim D, Sarbia M, et al. Noninvasive visualization of the activated alphavbeta3 integrin in cancer patients by positron emission tomography and [18F]Galacto-RGD. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Kenny LM, Coombes RC, Oulie I, Contractor KB, Miller M, Spinks TJ, et al. Phase I trial of the positron-emitting Arg-Gly-Asp (RGD) peptide radioligand 18F-AH111585 in breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:879–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Boturyn D, Coll JL, Garanger E, Favrot MC, Dumy P. Template assembled cyclopeptides as multimeric system for integrin targeting and endocytosis. J Am Chem Soc. 2004;126:5730–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu S, Liu Z, Chen K, Yan Y, Watzlowik P, Wester HJ, et al. 18F-labeled galacto and PEGylated RGD dimers for PET imaging of αvβ3 integrin expression. Mol Imaging Biol. 2010;12:530–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Mittra ES, Goris ML, Iagaru AH, Kardan A, Burton L, Berganos R, et al. Pilot pharmacokinetic and dosimetric studies of (18)F-FPPRGD2: a PET radiopharmaceutical agent for imaging α(v)β(3) integrin levels. Radiology. 2011;260:182–91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Iagaru A, Mosci C, Shen B, Chin FT, Mittra E, Telli ML, et al. 18F-FPPRGD2 PET/CT: pilot phase evaluation of breast cancer patients. Radiology. 2014;273:549–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Iagaru A, Mosci C, Mittra E, Zaharchuk G, Fischbein N, Harsh G, et al. Glioblastoma multiforme recurrence: an exploratory study of (18)F FPPRGD2 PET/CT. Radiology. 2015;277:497–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Minamimoto R, Jamali M, Barkhodari A, Mosci C, Mittra E, Shen B, et al. Biodistribution of the (18)F-FPPRGD2 PET radiopharmaceutical in cancer patients: an atlas of SUV measurements. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1850–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Burger RA, Brady MF, Bookman MA, Fleming GF, Monk BJ, Huang H, et al. Gynecologic Oncology Group. Incorporation of bevacizumab in the primary treatment of ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:2473–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stockler MR, Hilpert F, Friedlander M, King MT, Wenzel L, Lee CK, et al. Patient-reported outcome results from the open-label phase III AURELIA trial evaluating bevacizumab-containing therapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1309–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tewari KS, Sill MW, Long 3rd HJ, Penson RT, Huang H, Ramondetta LM, et al. Improved survival with bevacizumab in advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:734–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Chin FT, Shen B, Liu S, Berganos RA, Chang E, Mittra E, et al. First experience with clinical-grade ([18F]FPP(RGD2): an automated multi-step radiosynthesis for clinical PET studies. Mol Imaging Biol. 2012;14:88–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, Brown ML, Royal HD, Siegel BA, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:885–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, Herholz K, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma AA, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1773–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Morrison MS, Ricketts SA, Barnett J, Cuthbertson A, Tessier J, Wedge SR. Use of a novel Arg-Gly-Asp radioligand, 18F-AH111585, to determine changes in tumor vascularity after antitumor therapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:116–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Liu Z, Liu S, Wang F, Liu S, Chen X. Noninvasive imaging of tumor integrin expression using (18)F-labeled RGD dimer peptide with PEG (4) linkers. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:1296–307.

  33. Giatromanolaki A, Koukourakis MI, Theodossiou D, Barbatis K, O'Byrne K, Harris AL, et al. Comparative evaluation of angiogenesis assessment with anti-factor-VIII and anti-CD31 immunostaining in non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 1997;3:2485–92.

  34. Lorger M, Krueger JS, O’Neal M, Staflin K, Felding-Habermann B. Activation of tumor cell integrin alphavbeta3 controls angiogenesis and metastatic growth in the brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:10666–71.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank our research coordinators, the radiochemistry staff, and the nuclear medicine technologists. We particularly thank all the patients who agreed to participate in the study and their families.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, C21, Stanford, CA, 94305-5281, USA

    Ryogo Minamimoto, Mehran Jamali, Amir Barkhodari, Sanjiv Sam Gambhir & Andrei Iagaru

  2. Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford (MIPS), Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Ryogo Minamimoto, Mehran Jamali & Sanjiv Sam Gambhir

  3. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Amer Karam & Oliver Dorigo

Authors
  1. Ryogo Minamimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amer Karam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehran Jamali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amir Barkhodari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sanjiv Sam Gambhir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Oliver Dorigo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrei Iagaru
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrei Iagaru.

Ethics declarations

Funding

The Mary Lake Polan Endowment supported the research activities of O.D. and this project.

Conflict of interest

S.S.G. Activities related to the present article: none to disclose. Activities not related to the present article: on the board of Endra, Enlight, ImaginAB, MagArray, SiteOne Therapeutics, VisualSonics/Sonosite, and Click Diagnostics; consultant for VisualSonics/Sonosite, Gamma Medica, BMEB, and Bracco; received grants from General Electric and Sanofi-Aventis; received honoraria from Imaging AB; holds stock in Enlight and VisualSonics/Sonosite; received compensation for travel and accommodations from Gamma Camera.

A.I. Activities related to the present article: none to disclose. Activities not related to the present article: received grants from GE Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare.

The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Research support

Department discretionary funds (O.D.).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Minamimoto, R., Karam, A., Jamali, M. et al. Pilot prospective evaluation of 18F-FPPRGD2 PET/CT in patients with cervical and ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43, 1047–1055 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3263-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3263-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation