4.7 Article

89Zr-Bevacizumab PET of Early Antiangiogenic Tumor Response to Treatment with HSP90 Inhibitor NVP-AUY922

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
卷 51, 期 5, 页码 761-767

出版社

SOC NUCLEAR MEDICINE INC
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.071043

关键词

VEGF; HSP90; PET imaging; biomarker; angiogenesis

资金

  1. Dutch Cancer Society [RUG 2007-3739, RUG 2009-4273]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Angiogenesis is a critical step in tumor development, in which vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a key growth aspect. Heat shock protein 90 (HSP90), a molecular chaperone, is essential for the activity of key proteins involved in VEGF transcription. Currently, no biomarkers to predict the effect of, or monitor, HSP90 inhibition therapy in individual patients exist. Zr-89-bevacizumab PET provides a noninvasive tool to monitor tumor VEGF levels. The aim of this study was to investigate Zr-89-bevacizumab PET for early antiangiogenic tumor response evaluation of treatment with the new HSP90 inhibitor NVP-AUY922. In xenografts of A2780 and its cisplatin-resistant CP70 human ovarian cancer subline, Zr-89-bevacizumab small-animal PET was performed before and after NVP-AUY922 treatment and verified with histologic response and ex vivo tumor VEGF levels. Compared with pretreatment values, 2 wk of NVP-AUY922 treatment decreased Zr-89-bevacizumab uptake by 44.4% (P = 0.0003) in A2780 xenografts, whereas tumor uptake was not affected in CP70 xenografts. The same pattern was observed in A2780 and CP70 tumor VEGF levels, measured with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and mean vessel density after NVP-AUY922 treatment. These findings coincided with reduction in the proliferation rate, assessed by Ki67 staining, in A2780 tumor tissue only. Conclusion: Zr-89-bevacizumab PET was in line with the antiangiogenic response and direct antitumor effects after NVP-AUY922 treatment, supporting the specificity of Zr-89-bevacizumab PET as a sensitive technique to monitor the antiangiogenic response of HSP90 inhibition in vivo.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据