550 likes | 567 Views
0. A New Liver Imaging Agent David R. Vera, PhD Department of Radiology University of California, San Diego. 0. New Measurements from an Old Liver Imaging Agent David R. Vera, PhD Department of Radiology University of California, San Diego. 0. Redesign an Agent to Measure
E N D
0 A New Liver Imaging Agent David R. Vera, PhD Department of Radiology University of California, San Diego
0 New Measurements from an Old Liver Imaging Agent David R. Vera, PhD Department of Radiology University of California, San Diego
0 Redesign an Agent to Measure Effective Plasma Flow It was Initially Designed to Measure Tissue Function (receptor concentration) We Will not Alter the Chemical Structure
TcNGA: UC Davis mid-1980sTcGSA: Nihon Mediphysics 1992 Stadalnik et al J Nucl Med 1985; 26: 1233
0 The Molecular Target:The Asialoglycoprotein Receptor ASGP-R • Specific for galactose-terminated macromolecules • Hepatocytes only • High capacity • No pharmacology
[99mTc]-Galactosyl-NeoglycoalbuminTcNGA Receptor Substrate: Galactose Backbone: Human Serum Albumin Reporter: Technetium-99m Vera et al Radiology 1984; 151: 191
Galactosyl-Neoglycoalbumin: GSA Receptor Substrate: galactose Backbone: HSA Chelator: DTPA Radioactive Atom: Tc-99m
0 Introduction[68Ga]GSA Uptake is Determined by Multiple Factors: effective hepatic plasma flow, Fhepatic plasma volume (reaction volume), Vhreceptor affinity, kbreceptor concentration, [R]o
[99mTc]Galactosyl-Neoglycoalbumin Rabbit, iv injection (~ 500 uCi) Dynamic imaging (0 – 20 mins, 5 sec/frame), liver Planar imaging Radiology 1984; 151: 191-196
Receptor-Binding RadiotracersBimolecular Reaction • [R] Receptor Concentration • kbForward Binding Rate Constant • k-bReverse Binding Rate Constant
Kinetic ParametersBimolecular Reaction Rate uptake rate = kb[L][R] kb Forward Binding Rate Constant [R] Receptor Concentration [L] Ligand Concentration
Binding assay Slope=KD
Control of affinity Vera et al J Nucl Med 1984; 25: 770
Design Decisions What is the optimal affinity? Low number of galactose units per HSA? High number of galactose units per HSA? What amount of NGA should we inject? Should we use a “tracer dose” (Lo << Ro)? Should Lo approximate Ro?
Kinetic Model: TcNGA Vera et al J Nucl Med 1991; 31: 1169
Vera et al IEEE BME 1983; 13: 311
Vera et al IEEE BME 1983; 13: 311
Parameter IdentifiabilityConclusions: Moderate affinity Avoid high tissue extraction Inject an adequate amount of ligand Lo should approximate Ro use 26 pmol/g of body weight
Generate Time-Activity Curves Y1 Data Set Heart TAC Y2 Data Set Liver TAC Last of 120 frames from zero to 30 minutes
Cirrhotic Patient [R]o = 0.270 kb = 2.94 Ve = 2.44 Vh = 0.267 F = 0.454 Healthy Subject 0.914 mM 2.23 mM-1 min-1 1.99 L 0.274 L 0.685 L min-1 patcfr
Healthy Subject [R]o = 0.914 ± 0.099 mM kb = 2.23 ± 0.73 mM-1 min-1 Ve = 1.99 ± 0.02 L Vh = 0.274 ± 0.001 L F = 0.685 ± 0.384 L min-1 norcrf
Cirrhotic Patient [R]o = 0.270 ± 0.018 mM kb = 2.94 ± 1.38 mM-1 min-1 Ve = 2.44 ± 0.09 L Vh = 0.267 ± 0.005 L F = 0.454 ± 0.858 L min-1 patcfr
0 Pimstone et al. Hepatology 1994
0 NonAlcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) Spectrum of disease NonAlcoholicSteatohepatitis (NASH) Early Fibrosis Cirrhosis Inflammation, Late Fibrosis + Steatosis NAFLDSteatosis small percent HepatomaPrimary Liver Cancer
0 Nonalcoholic SteatohepatitisScope of the Problem in U.S. } • Prevalence NAFLD: ~ 20-23%% • Prevalence of NASH: 2-3% • NASH:- severe fibrosis: 15-50% - cirrhosis: 7-16%- rate of liver-specific mortality in NASH cirrhotics: ~ 10% per decade - risk for hepatoma The most common chronic liver disease
0 NAFLD Prevalence • Obesen Patients-NAFLD: 60-90%-NASH: 20-25%-Cirrhosis:2-3% • Diabetic Patients:-NAFLD: ~ 50% -NASH: 25% -Cirrhosis: 8% • Obese + Diabetic:-NAFLD: 100%-NASH: 50%-Cirrhosis: ~20%
Design DecisionsMeasure Effective Plasma Flow What is the optimal affinity? Low number of galactose units per HSA? High number of galactose units per HSA? What amount of NGA should we inject? Should we use a “tracer dose” (Lo << Ro)? Should Lo approximate Ro?
Kinetic Model: TcNGA Vera et al J Nucl Med 1991; 31: 1169
Vera et al IEEE BME 1983; 13: 311
Parameter IdentifiabilityTo Measure Effective Plasma FlowConclusions: Moderate or High affinity Inject an adequate amount of ligand Lo << Ro use 1.5 pmol/g of body weight
0 68Ga-GSA can distinguish early Fibrosis?Experimental Design Use two models of rat liver Disease Fibrosis: DEN treatment (4, 8, 10, or 12 weeks) Fatty Liver: CDAA treatment (4, or 8 weeks) Use healthy rats Perform Ga-68-labeled GSA functional imaging (45 - 95 µCi, 1.5 pmol/g total body weight) Calculate T90 (time of liver to reach 90%) Section liver for histology Determine Fibrosis Score (F0 – F4) based on histology
0 Fibrosis Score F0 No Fibrosis F1 Mild Fibrosis (short septa extending in the perisinusoidal space in any zone) F2 Moderate Fibrosis (clear cut portal fibrosis expansion and/or longer septa) F3 Advanced Fibrosis (bridging of any degree with/or without regenerative nodules) F4 Cirrhosis (reorganization of hepatocyte to sinusoidal spaces)
Control 0 DEN 4w 6w 8w 10w 12w 14w
Control = CSAA CDAA 6 weeks 0 H&E Sirius Red
0 Rat 09: T90 = 2.22 min Stage 0: No fibrosis
0 Rat 16: T90 = 2.37min Stage 2
0 Rat 21: T90 = 3.17min Stage 3: Bridging
0 Rat 15: T90 = 4.41min; Stage 4 Bridging with extinction of architecture
0 Rat 19 four weeks of DEN treatmentmix of F2, F3, & F4 F2 fibrosis septa Entire Left & right lobes Portion of cludate lobe T90 = 3.9 min F3 bridging Portion of cludate lobe F4 cirrhosis Portion of cludate lobe