Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jun 12;57(11):4849-60.
doi: 10.1021/jm500389b. Epub 2014 May 19.

Alternative chelator for ⁸⁹Zr radiopharmaceuticals: radiolabeling and evaluation of 3,4,3-(LI-1,2-HOPO)

Affiliations

Alternative chelator for ⁸⁹Zr radiopharmaceuticals: radiolabeling and evaluation of 3,4,3-(LI-1,2-HOPO)

Melissa A Deri et al. J Med Chem. .

Abstract

Zirconium-89 is an effective radionuclide for antibody-based positron emission tomography (PET) imaging because its physical half-life (78.41 h) matches the biological half-life of IgG antibodies. Desferrioxamine (DFO) is currently the preferred chelator for (89)Zr(4+); however, accumulation of (89)Zr in the bones of mice suggests that (89)Zr(4+) is released from DFO in vivo. An improved chelator for (89)Zr(4+) could eliminate the release of osteophilic (89)Zr(4+) and lead to a safer PET tracer with reduced background radiation dose. Herein, we present an octadentate chelator 3,4,3-(LI-1,2-HOPO) (or HOPO) as a potentially superior alternative to DFO. The HOPO ligand formed a 1:1 Zr-HOPO complex that was evaluated experimentally and theoretically. The stability of (89)Zr-HOPO matched or surpassed that of (89)Zr-DFO in every experiment. In healthy mice, (89)Zr-HOPO cleared the body rapidly with no signs of demetalation. Ultimately, HOPO has the potential to replace DFO as the chelator of choice for (89)Zr-based PET imaging agents.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Structures of the currently used chelator for 89Zr, DFO, and the newly investigated alternative chelator, HOPO.
Figure 2
Figure 2
HPLC chromatogram of the co-injection of radioactive 89Zr-HOPO and nonradioactive Zr-HOPO. The ∼30 s separation between the two peaks is due to the sequential setup of the UV and radioactive detectors.
Figure 3
Figure 3
General chemical structures and optimized DFT structures for (I) the Zr-HOPO complex; (II) a complex of an alternative HOPO-based ligand [3,3,3-(LI-1,2-HOPO)] with Zr; (III) a previously studied positively charged Zr-DFO complex; (IIIa) a new, more stable conformation of the same charged Zr-DFO complex; and (IV) a neutral, uncharged Zr-DFO complex.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Radio-TLC profiles of the 89Zr-HOPO radiolabeling reaction over time at different concentrations of ligand. Two peaks are observed, with the first peak (the kinetic product) converting to the second peak (the thermodynamic product) over time. The initial area ratio and separation of the two peaks are dependent upon the concentration of the ligand.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Coronal PET images of 89Zr-HOPO. Healthy mice were administered 89Zr-HOPO (260 μCi [9.6 MBq] in 0.9% sterile saline) via tail vein injection and imaged between 10 min and 24 h after injection. The gall bladder (a), gut (b), and bladder (c) can be visualized. The 89Zr-HOPO complex undergoes rapid renal clearance followed by slower hepatobiliary clearance. No uptake of 89Zr in the bone is observed.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Biodistribution of 89Zr-HOPO and 89Zr-DFO in select organs. Healthy, athymic nude mice were injected with either 89Zr-HOPO or 89Zr-DFO (24–35 μCi [0.89–1.29 MBq] in 0.9% sterile saline) via the tail vein, sacrificed at specified time points, and necropsied. The concentration of radioactivity in the chosen organs is expressed as %ID/g and presented as an average value from four animals ± standard deviation. Bl = blood, GB = gall bladder, L = liver, LI = large intestines, SI = small intestines, K = kidney, Bo = bone. ∗ indicates P values of <0.05.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Blood clearance of 89Zr-HOPO and 89Zr-DFO in healthy, athymic nude mice (n = 4) over time. Inset shows a zoomed graph for further detail.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sinicropi M.; Amantea D.; Caruso A.; Saturnino C. Chemical and Biological Properties of Toxic Metals and Use of Chelating Agents for the Pharmacological Treatment of Metal Poisoning. Arch. Toxicol. 2010, 84, 501–520. - PubMed
    1. Baran E. J. Chelation Therapies: A Chemical and Biochemical Perspective. Curr. Med. Chem. 2010, 17, 3658–3672. - PubMed
    1. Price E. W.; Orvig C. Matching Chelators to Radiometals for Radiopharmaceuticals. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 260–290. - PubMed
    1. Zeglis B. M.; Houghton J. L.; Evans M. J.; Viola-Villegas N.; Lewis J. S. Underscoring the Influence of Inorganic Chemistry on Nuclear Imaging with Radiometals. Inorg. Chem. 2013, 53, 1880–1899. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Deri M. A.; Zeglis B. M.; Francesconi L. C.; Lewis J. S. PET Imaging with 89Zr: From Radiochemistry to the Clinic. Nucl. Med. Biol. 2013, 40, 3–14. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances