Advertisement

Clinical and Translational Imaging

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 295–301 | Cite as

Targeting prostate cancer with the anti-PSMA scFvD2B: a theranostic promise for nuclear medicine

  • Debora CarpaneseEmail author
  • Alessandra Zorz
  • Laura Evangelista
  • Nicola Salvarese
Mini - Review
  • 20 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Radiochemistry and radiopharmacology

Abstract

Introduction

Despite the significant research activity in the design and validation of new PSMA-targeting agents, prostate cancer (PCa) remains the second most common cancer in men worldwide. PSMA-specific labeled monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) demonstrated a discrete effectiveness in the clinic, but with some drawbacks due to their large size. To circumvent these problems, mAbs-derived fragments have been investigated, since they retain the high affinity of the parent mAb for the target, being also endowed with a more favorable pharmacokinetics. This review focuses on the single-chain variable fragment D2B (scFvD2B) potentiality as a new prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-specific molecular vector in nuclear medicine (NM) applications for both diagnosis and treatment of PCa.

Methods

A critical review of PubMed and Web of Science (including MEDLINE) in the early 2019 was performed, searching for research articles focusing on the application of the fragment scFvD2B and the parent antibody IgGD2B in preclinical NM.

Results

The scFvD2B, which is derived from one of the most promising PSMA-specific mAbs, IgGD2B, has been recently investigated and labeled with Indium-111, Iodine-131, and Iodine-123. Overall, scFvD2B showed a great potential in the preclinical setting, demonstrating a promising pharmacokinetics, especially in terms of high stability and specificity, efficiently accumulating in PSMA-expressing PCa tumors.

Conclusion

scFvD2B seems to be a promising fragment as a molecular vector in NM applications. Nevertheless, further investigations, especially with radiometal-labeled scFvD2B, are necessary to better characterize and optimize the unique properties of this fragment, providing the basis for a rapid translation into the clinic.

Keywords

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) Prostate cancer Nuclear molecular imaging Monoclonal antibody fragments Single-chain variable fragment D2B (scFvD2B) Radiopharmaceuticals 

Notes

Authors’ contributions

DC: content planning, literature search and review, manuscript writing, and editing. AZ: manuscript writing. LE: manuscript writing and content planning. NS: content planning, manuscript writing, and editing.

Funding

No funds were used for this review manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

No animals or humans were involved.

References

  1. 1.
    Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I et al (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68:394–424.  https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Han M, Partin AW (2001) Current clinical applications of the In-capromab Pendetide scan (ProstaScint(R) scan, Cyt-356). Rev Urol 3:165–171Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    von Eyben FE, Roviello G, Kiljunen T et al (2018) Third-line treatment and 177Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 45:496–508.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3895-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Evangelista L, Cuppari L, Zattoni F et al (2019) The future of choline PET in the era of prostate specific membrane antigen. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 63:19–28.  https://doi.org/10.23736/S1824-4785.18.03062-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Evangelista L, Guttilla A, Zattoni F et al (2013) Utility of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 63:1040–1048.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.09.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fanti S, Minozzi S, Castellucci P et al (2016) PET/CT with (11)C-choline for evaluation of prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: meta-analysis and critical review of available data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:55–69.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3202-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Evangelista L, Zattoni F, Gutilla A et al (2013) Choline PET or PET/CT and biochemical relapse of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med 38:305–314.  https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e3182867f3c CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ren J, Yuan L, Wen G et al (2016) The value of anti-1-amino-3-18F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Acta Radiol 57:487–493.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185115581541 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim SJ, Lee SW, Ha HK (2019) Diagnostic performance of radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for primary lymph node staging in newly diagnosed intermediate to high-risk prostate cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Int 102:27–36.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000493169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D et al (2016) Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive 68Ga–prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 70:926–937.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gourni E, Henriksen G (2017) Metal-based PSMA radioligands. Molecules 22:523.  https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22040523 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu H, Rajasekaran AK, Moy P et al (1998) Constitutive and antibody-induced internalization of prostate-specific membrane antigen. Cancer Res 58:4055–4060Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wilkinson S, Chodak G (2004) The role of 111indium-capromab pendetide imaging for assessing biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 172:133–136.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000132138.02846.08 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Calopedos RJS, Chalasani V, Asher R et al (2017) Lutetium-177-labelled anti-prostate-specific membrane antigen antibody and ligands for the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 20:352–360.  https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2017.23 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Colombatti M, Grasso S, Porzia A et al (2009) The prostate specific membrane antigen regulates the expression of IL-6 and CCL5 in prostate tumour cells by activating the MAPK pathways. PLoS One 4:e4608.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0004608 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lütje S, van Rij CM, Franssen GM et al (2015) Targeting human prostate cancer with 111In-labeled D2B IgG, F(ab′)2 and Fab fragments in nude mice with PSMA-expressing xenografts. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 10:28–36.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cmmi.1596 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Frigerio B, Fracasso G, Luison E et al (2013) A single-chain fragment against prostate specific membrane antigen as a tool to build theranostic reagents for prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer 49:2223–2232.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2013.01.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith-Jones PM, Vallabahajosula S, Goldsmith SJ et al (2000) In vitro characterization of radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies specific for the extracellular domain of prostate-specific membrane antigen. Cancer Res 60:5237–5243Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Frigerio B, Franssen G, Luison E et al (2017) Full preclinical validation of the 123I-labeled anti-PSMA antibody fragment scFvD2B for prostate cancer imaging. Oncotarget 8:10919–10930.  https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14229 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Coliva A, Zacchetti A, Luison E et al (2005) 90Y Labeling of monoclonal antibody MOv18 and preclinical validation for radioimmunotherapy of human ovarian carcinomas. Cancer Immunol Immunother 54:1200–1213.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00262-005-0693-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Figini M, Martin F, Ferri R et al (2009) Conversion of murine antibodies to human antibodies and their optimization for ovarian cancer therapy targeted to the folate receptor. Cancer Immunol Immunother 58:531–546.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00262-008-0575-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Frigerio B, Benigni F, Luison E et al (2015) Effect of radiochemical modification on biodistribution of scFvD2B antibody fragment recognising prostate specific membrane antigen. Immunol Lett 168:105–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imlet.2015.09.012.105-110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hernández-Jiménez T, Ferro-Flores G, Ocampo-Garcia B et al (2018) 177Lu-DOTA-HYNIC-Lys(Nal)-Urea-Glu: synthesis and assessment of the ability to target the prostate specific membrane antigen. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 318:2059–2066.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-018-6239-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Press OW, Shan D, Howell-Clark J et al (1996) Comparative metabolism and retention of iodine-125, yttrium-90, and indium-111 radioimmunoconjugates by cancer cells. Cancer Res 56:2123–2129Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Geissler F, Anderson SK, Venkatesan P et al (1992) Intracellular catabolism of radiolabeled anti-µ antibodies by malignant B-cells. Cancer Res 52:2907–2915Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Price EW, Orvig C (2014) Matching chelators to radiometals for radiopharmaceuticals. Chem Soc Rev 43:260–290.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c3cs60304k CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Watanabe N, Oriuchi N, Endo K et al (1999) Localization of indium-111 in human malignant tumor xenografts and control by chelators. Nucl Med Biol 26(7):853–858.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-8051(99)00057-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Strand J, Honarvar H, Perols A et al (2013) Influence of macrocyclic chelators on the targeting properties of 68Ga-labeled synthetic affibody molecules: comparison with 111In-labeled counterparts. PLoS One 8:e70028.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0070028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Akizawa H, Uehara T, Arano Y (2008) Renal uptake and metabolism of radiopharmaceuticals derived from peptides and proteins. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 60:1319–1328.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2008.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li L, Olafsen T, Anderson AL et al (2002) Reduction of kidney uptake in radiometal labeled peptide linkers conjugated to recombinant antibody fragments. Site-specific conjugation of DOTA-peptides to a Cys-diabody. Bioconjug Chem 13:985–995.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bc025565u CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tolmachev V, Stone-Elander S (2010) Radiolabelled proteins for positron emission tomography: pros and cons of labelling methods. Biochim Biophys Acta 1800:487–510.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbagen.2010.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Immunology and Molecular Oncology UnitVeneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCSPaduaItaly
  2. 2.Medical Physic UnitVeneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCSPaduaItaly
  3. 3.Nuclear Medicine UnitVeneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCSPaduaItaly
  4. 4.Institute of Condensed Matter Chemistry and Technologies for Energy ICMATE-CNRPaduaItaly

Personalised recommendations