Different chelators and different peptides together influence the in vitro and mouse in vivo properties of 99Tcm
- 1 February 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Nuclear Medicine Communications
- Vol. 22 (2) , 203-215
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00006231-200102000-00013
Abstract
Relatively few studies comparing different methods of labelling peptides with 99Tcm have been reported. In this investigation, we evaluated the influence of three chelators on the in vitro and in vivo properties of two small, similar peptides (HNE2 and HNE4) labelled with 99Tcm. Both peptides were labelled with hydrazinonicotinamide (HYNIC) (tricine) at pH 5-6 and with diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) and mercaptoacetyltriglycine (MAG3) at both pH 5-6 and 7-8. All ten preparations were brought to pH 7.2 immediately after labelling. Each preparation labelled well and control labelling showed each label to be attached specifically at chelation sites. Analysis of 37°C human serum incubates showed little evidence of label instability but high protein binding in several cases. The stability of 99Tcm to cysteine challenge for labelled DTPA- and MAG3-peptides was similar but lower than that for the HYNIC-peptides. Reverse phase HPLC of the DTPA-peptides, but not the MAG3-peptides, showed different 99Tcm species depending on labelling pH. The 3 h biodistributions in normal mice were generally independent of labelling pH for both MAG3-peptides but were heavily influenced by labelling pH for both DTPA-peptides. While significant differences in biodistribution for the same labelling method were evident between peptides, as expected, far larger differences in the case of both peptides resulted from changing chelators and, in the case of DTPA, changing the labelling method. In summary, the chelators and labelling methods influenced the biodistribution of 99Tcm in a characteristic fashion common to both peptides. Differences in biodistribution due to the different peptides were relatively small and generally lost in the much larger differences due to chelator and labelling method. In conclusion, it may be important to compare chelators and labelling methods before selecting a 99Tcm labelling method for any particular peptide.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Technetium-99m somatostatin analogues: effect of labelling methods and peptide sequenceEuropean Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 1999
- Preparation, 99mTc-Labeling, and in Vitro Characterization of HYNIC and N3S Modified RC-160 and [Tyr3]OctreotideBioconjugate Chemistry, 1999
- 99mTc Labeling of Highly Potent Small PeptidesBioconjugate Chemistry, 1997
- Preparation and Use of NHS-MAG3 for Technetium-99m Labeling of DNANuclear Medicine and Biology, 1997
- Technetium-99m antibodies labeled with MAG3 and SHNH: An in vitro and animal in vivo comparisonNuclear Medicine and Biology, 1996
- Comparative evaluation of 99Tcm-Hynic-HSA and 99Tcm-MAG3-HSA as possible blood pool agentsNuclear Medicine Communications, 1995
- Can a cysteine challenge assay predict the in vivo behavior of 99mTc-labeled antibodies?Nuclear Medicine and Biology, 1994
- The Coordination Chemistry of TechnetiumAdvances in Inorganic Chemistry, 1994
- Radioactive Labeling of Antibody: A Simple and Efficient MethodScience, 1983
- Tissue Weights of the Rat. I. Normal Values Determined By Dissection and Chemical MethodsExperimental Biology and Medicine, 1956