Radiolabeled R954 Derivatives for Imaging Bradykinin B1 Receptor Expression with Positron Emission Tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peptide receptors have emerged as promising targets for diagnosis and therapy. The aberrant overexpression of these receptors in different cancer subtypes allows for the adoption of new treatment strategies that complement conventional chemotherapies. Bradykinin B1 receptor (B1R) is a G protein-coupled receptor that is overexpressed in many cancers, with limited expression in healthy tissues. Previously, we developed 68 Ga- and 18 F-labeled derivatives of B1R antagonist peptides B9858 and B9958, and successfully targeted B1R-expressing tumor xenografts in vivo. R954 (Ac-Orn-Arg-Oic-Pro-Gly-αMePhe-Ser- d -2-Nal-Ile), a potent B1R antagonist, is reportedly more stable than B9858 against peptidase degradation. We evaluated two radiolabeled derivatives of R954 ( 68 Ga-HTK01083 and 18 F-HTK01146) for B1R PET imaging. Peptides were synthesized via solid phase strategy. Nonradioactive standards were obtain by reacting GaCl 3 with DOTA-dPEG2-R954 and by clicking N -propargyl- N, N -dimethylammoniomethyl-trifluoroborate with azidoacetyl-dPEG2-R954. Binding affinity for B1R was determined by an in vitro competition binding assay. 68 Ga-HTK01083 was obtained by incubating DOTA-dPEG2-R954 with 68 GaCl 3 under acidic conditions, while 18 F-HTK01146 was prepared via an 18 F– 19 F isotope exchange reaction. Biodistribution and imaging studies were conducted at 1 h postinjection (p.i.) in mice inoculated with B1R-expressing (B1R+) and B1R-nonexpressing (B1R−) cells. HTK01083 and HTK01146 bound B1R with good affinity ( K i = 30.5 and 24.8 nM, respectively). 68 Ga/ 18 F-labeled R954 were obtained on average in ≥10% decay-corrected radiochemical yield with >99% radiochemical purity and ≥52 GBq/μmol specific activity. For both tracers, clearance was predominantly renal with minimal involvement of the hepatobiliary system. For PET images, B1R+ tumors, kidneys, and bladder were visible. At 1 h p.i., uptake in B1R+ tumor was comparable between 68 Ga-HTK01083 (8.46 ± 1.44%ID/g) and 18 F-HTK01146 (9.25 ± 0.69%ID/g). B1R+ tumor-to-blood and B1R+ tumor-to-muscle ratios were 6.32 ± 1.44 and 20.7 ± 3.58 for 68 Ga-HTK01083, and 7.24 ± 2.56 and 19.5 ± 4.29 for 18 F-HTK01146. Our results indicate R954 is a good lead sequence for optimization of B1R tracers for cancer imaging.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".