4.7 Article

Novel bioactive and stable neurotensin peptide analogues capable of delivering radiopharmaceuticals and molecular beacons to tumors

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 46, 期 15, 页码 3403-3411

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jm030081k

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The prevalence of neurotensin receptor (NTR) in several human tumors makes it an attractive target for the delivery of cytotoxic drugs and imaging agents. Native neurotensin (NT) is a tridecapeptide that binds to NTR and induces tumor growth. Unfortunately, NT has a short plasma half-life, which hinders its use for in vivo biomedical applications. Numerous reports suggest that Arg(8)-Arg(9) and Tyr(11)-Ile(12) amide bonds are particularly susceptible to degradation by proteolytic enzymes. Predicated on this observation, we substituted Arg(8), Arg(9), and Ile(12) amino acids with the corresponding commercially available mimics. These surrogate amino acids are amenable to standard Fmoc peptide synthesis strategy, and the resulting compounds are stable in biological media for >4 h and bind to NTR with high affinity. Furthermore, conjugating DTPA to the new peptides and subsequent labeling with In-111-DTPA for nuclear imaging or fluorescein for optical imaging did not diminish the NTR binding affinities of the peptides. In vivo biodistribution of a representative In-111-DTPA-NT peptide analogue in SCID mice bearing NTR-positive human adenocarcinoma (HT29) xenograft shows that the compound was primarily retained in tumor tissue (2.2% ID/g) and the kidneys (4.8% ID/g) at 4 h postinjection. Coinjection of cold NT and the radiolabeled NT peptide analogue inhibited the tumor but not the kidney uptake, demonstrating that retention of the radiolabeled compound in tumor tissue was mediated by NTR specific uptake while it accumulates in the kidneys by a nonspecific mechanism. These findings show that the new NT peptide analogues are robust and can deliver imaging agents to NTR-positive tumors such as pancreatic cancer.

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