Page 37 - ARNM-2-1
P. 37

Advances in Radiotherapy
            & Nuclear Medicine                                                  99m Tc-DOX in multidrug resistance studies



            a suitable radionuclide for in vivo imaging, as it is a gamma   Lewis lung carcinoma show uptake in the liver and kidneys,
            emitter with a short half-life of 6 h. We used a culture of K562   the organs responsible for excretion. Ex vivo studies, on the
            and Lucena 1 (a multidrug-resistant cell line) to investigate   other hand, provided an avenue for visualizing the  99m Tc-
            whether  99m Tc-DOX retains its cytotoxicity and structural   DOX uptake in the tumor. In a separate study, we found
            characteristics.  Tc-DOX, similar to unlabeled DOX, was   that breast carcinoma lesions exhibited increased uptake
                        99]
            shown  to be cytotoxic  to  chronic  myeloid  leukemia cell   of   99m Tc-DOX, which  was eliminated  through  renal and
            lines (K562) and maintain its capacity as a Pgp substrate   hepatic routes. 40
            in vitro. Furthermore, the cells were not radiosensitive to
            the amount of radionuclide present in the molecule. This   5. Conclusion
            could be observed by incubating multidrug-resistant cells
            with  99m Tc-DOX and verifying that cytotoxicity was only   The present study illustrates the potential of labeling
                                                                         99m
            observed  when  the  drug  was  internalized  and  retained   DOX  with   Tc,  an  approach  that  may  prove  to  be
            inside the cell.                                   conducive  to  the  design  of  the  next-generation  DOX
                                                               derivatives used in overcoming drug resistance,
              DOX labeled with radionuclides have previously been   improving intracellular DOX retention, and enhancing
            tested to study the characteristics of DOX in tumors. Polyak   sustained  therapeutic  effect.  Follow-up  studies  are
                49
                              50
            et al.  and Bao  et al.,  using different DOX liposomal   warranted to confirm whether  99m Tc-DOX can serve as a
            delivery systems, performed a direct radiolabeling of DOX,   drug resistance marker.
            achieving an efficiency of approximately 70%. In contrast,
            we used a non-liposomal DOX, obtaining a 90% efficiency   Acknowledgments
            by direct labeling.
                                                               We appreciate the contribution of Dra. Eliene Oliveira
              Another approach to evaluating tumor growth is using   Kozlowski kindly prepared the culture of 3LL cells and
            radiopharmaceuticals against DNA bases. Sun  et al.    conducted the tumor induction experiment.
                                                         51
            imaged DNA synthesis with PET using  F-1-(2’-deoxy-2’-
                                           18
            fluoro-beta-D-arabinofuranosyl)thymine ( F-FMAU), a   Funding
                                               18
            pyrimidine analog, which is phosphorylated by thymidine
            kinase and incorporated into DNA. Their results    This study was supported by grants from Fundação
            demonstrated  that  F-FMAU  was  selectively  retained   Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado
                            18
            in the DNA of proliferating cells and was resistant to   do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ) and Conselho Nacional de
            degradation. 51                                    Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq).
              Koukourakis et al.  labeled liposomal DOX with  99m Tc   Conflict of interest
                             52
            and evaluated its uptake in patients with brain tumors. The
            radiolabeled DOX accumulation was 13- to 19-fold higher   The authors declare they have no competing interests.
            in glioblastomas and 7-  to 13-fold higher in metastatic
            lesions than in the normal brain. Kumar et al.  studied   Author contributions
                                                  53
            the DOX labeled with  99m Tc in vitro and in Ehrlich ascites   Conceptualization: Vivian M. Rumjanek, Bianca Gutfilen
            tumor-bearing mice, and demonstrated the physiological   Investigation: All authors
            distribution of 99mTc-DOX in kidneys and liver. The   Methodology: All authors
            tumor had a focused uptake of the radiopharmaceutical at   Writing – original draft: All authors
            1.5 h up to 4 h. Bao et al.  demonstrated that the labeled   Writing – review & editing: Bianca Gutfilen, Sergio Augusto
                                50
            pegylated DOX in normal rats had a slow blood clearance   Lopes de Souza, Vivian M. Rumjanek
            and a high uptake in the bowel and surrounding tissues.
            In another study, Yang et al.  investigated the behavior of   Ethics approval and consent to participate
                                  54
            DOX liposomes labeled with  111] In after their intravenous
            administration to intracranial human glioblastoma tumor-  National Cancer Institute, Ministry of Health, Brazil.
            bearing mice suffering blood–brain barrier disruption   Consent for publication
            induced by focused ultrasound.
              In this study, DOX was labeled using a direct method,   Not applicable.
            an approach that allows for high labeling efficiencies. It   Availability of data
            is important to point out that there is a difference in the
            biodistribution of   99m Tc and   99m Tc-DOX.   99m Tc-DOX is   Data are available from the corresponding author on
            uptaken by the kidneys in normal mice, while mice with   reasonable request.


            Volume 2 Issue 1 (2024)                         6                       https://doi.org/10.36922/arnm.2822
   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42