Add to Library
Sep 10, 2015
PURPOSE: To explore the value of a new simple lyophilized kit for labeling PRGD2 peptide (18F-ALF-NOTA-PRGD2, denoted as 18F-alfatide) in the determination of metabolic tumor volume (MTV) with micro-PET in lewis lung carcinoma (LLC) tumor-bearing C57BL/6 mice verified by pathologic examination and compared with those using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET. METHODS: All LLC tumor-bearing C57BL/6 mice underwent two attenuation-corrected whole-body micro-PET scans with the radiotracers 18F-alfatide and 18F-FDG within two days. 18F-alfatide metabolic tumor volume (VRGD) and 18F-FDG metabolic tumor volume (VFDG) were manually delineated slice by slice on PET images. Pathologic tumor volume (VPath) was measured in vitro after the xenografts were removed. RESULTS: A total of 37 mice with NSCLC xenografts were enrolled and 33 of them underwent 18F-alfatide PET, and 35 of them underwent 18F-FDG PET and all underwent pathological examination. The mean ± standard deviation of VPath, VRGD, and VFDG were 0.59±0.32 cm3 (range,0.13~1.64 cm3), 0.61±0.37 cm3 (range,0.15~1.86 cm3), and 1.24±0.53 cm3 (range,0.17~2.20 cm3), respectively. VPath vs. VRGD, VPath vs. VFDG, and VRGD vs. VFDG comparisons were t = -0.145, P = 0.885, t = -6.239, P<0.001, and t = -5.661, P<0.001, respectively. No significant difference was found between VPath and VRGD. VFDG was much larger than VRGD and VPath. VRGD seemed more approximate to the pathologic gross tumor volume. Furthermore, VPath was more strongly correlated with VRGD (R = 0.964,P<0.001) than with VFDG (R = 0.584,P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: 18F-alfatide PET provided a better estimation of gross tumor volume than 18F-FDG PET in LLC tumor-bearing C57BL/6 mice.