Noninvasive Evaluation of Metabolic Tumor Volume in Lewis Lung Carcinoma Tumor-Bearing C57BL/6 Mice with Micro-PET and the Radiotracers 18F-Alfatide and 18F-FDG: A Comparative Analysis

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 (V_RGD) and ¹⁸F-FDG metabolic tumor volume (V_FDG) were manually delineated slice by slice on PET images. Pathologic tumor volume (V_Path) 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 V_Path, V_RGD, and V_FDG 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. V_Path vs. V_RGD, V_Path vs. V_FDG, and V_RGD vs. V_FDG 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 V_Path and V_RGD. V_FDG was much larger than V_RGD and V_Path. V_RGD seemed more approximate to the pathologic gross tumor volume. Furthermore, V_Path was more strongly correlated with V_RGD (R = 0.964,P<0.001) than with V_FDG (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.