Radiolabelled 5 '-iodo-2 '-deoxyuridine: A promising alternative to [F-18]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose for PET studies of early response to anticancertreatment
P. Carnochan et R. Brooks, Radiolabelled 5 '-iodo-2 '-deoxyuridine: A promising alternative to [F-18]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose for PET studies of early response to anticancertreatment, NUCL MED BI, 26(6), 1999, pp. 667-672
We investigated the potential of radiolabelled 5 iodo-2'-deoxyuridine (IUdR
) as a pharmacodynamic probe for use with positron emission tomography (PET
) in studies of early proliferative response to anticancer treatment. Using
the hormone-responsive rat mammary carcinoma OES.HR1, we used a multiple r
adiotracer method to examine treatment-induced changes in 24 h tumour reten
tion of [I-131]IUdR, uptake of [H-3]2-deoxy-D-glucose ([H-3]DG) together wi
th [Tc-99m]hexylmethylpropylene amineoxine ([Tc-99m]HMPAO) uptake as a meas
ure of blood flow. Radiotracer data were compared with macroscopic changes
in tumour growth, and cell proliferation as determined by DNA histogram flo
w cytometry. From 4 days after tumour growth arrest induced by oestrogen ab
lation, a sustained fall in tumour cell proliferation was demonstrated, whi
ch was associated with reduced tumour uptake of each tracer. Whereas reduce
d levels of tumour [3H]DG could be accounted for by changes in blood flow,
this was not the case for [I-131]IUdR, which was found to be closely relate
d to percentage S-phase cells within tumour (r = 0.73, p < 0.002). It was a
lso estimated that residual levels of radioiodide may contribute significan
tly to the low levels of retained radioactivity associated with responding
tumours at 24 h following IUdR administration, suggesting that metabolite c
orrection methods should be implemented as part of IUdR PET imaging protoco
ls. We conclude that [I-124]IUdR is a promising alternative to [ F-18]fluor
odeoxyglucose ([F-18]FDG) for the early assessment by PET of tumour respons
e to treatments directed at targets associated with cell proliferation. NUC
L MED BIOL 26;6:667-672, 1999. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights re
served.