JIANG Dawei, SUN Yanhong, WANG Lihua, et al. Comparison study of two 18F labeling methods of peptides[J]. Nuclear techniques, 2015, 38(7): 070301
DOI:
JIANG Dawei, SUN Yanhong, WANG Lihua, et al. Comparison study of two 18F labeling methods of peptides[J]. Nuclear techniques, 2015, 38(7): 070301 DOI: 10.11889/j.0253-3219.2015.hjs.38.070301.
Comparison study of two 18F labeling methods of peptides
Background: Some radiopharmaceuticals based on peptides have been applied in preclinical and clinical trials
in the meantime
a large number of peptides are to be exploited. After years of development
radiolabeling techniques of peptides have progressed to be a system method. Through these methods of radiolabeling
peptides’ physiological activities would be influenced. Purpose: In this paper
we summarized two current commonly used 18F labeling methods for preparation of radiopharmaceuticals based on peptides. Methods: By comparison of labeling conditions
radiochemistry yields
specific activity of labeling products
radiochemistry purity
stability and pharmacokinetics of final products
we evaluated advantages and disadvantages of the two methods
with the hope to provide reference data for future research of 18F-labeled peptide radiopharmaceuticals. Results: Both [18F]SFB and Al18F-NOTA could readily label RGDyk peptide with 18F
with a radiochemistry yield of about 8.5% and 15%
respectively. [18F]SFB could produce radiolabeled peptides with better specific activity
while Al18F-NOTA proved to be a more time-saving method. For stability test
more than 80% of both [18F]SFB and Al18F-NOTA could maintain intact in PBS (Phosphate Buffer Solution) or BSA (Bovine Serum Albumin) within 360 min
and about 50% radiolabeled peptides could survive in vivo. Conclusion: The in vitro and in vivo stability of [18F]-RGD obtained with both methods were excellent
and biodistribution pattern of radiolabeled products via two methods did not show obvious differences. Abstract