Synthesis of a Bifunctional Cross‐Bridged Chelating Agent, Peptide Conjugation, and Comparison of <sup>68</sup>Ga Labeling and Complex Stability Characteristics with Established Chelators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract [ 68 Ga]Ga 3+ can be introduced into receptor‐specific peptidic carriers via different chelators to obtain radiotracers for Positron Emission Tomography imaging and the chosen chelating agent considerably influences the in vivo pharmacokinetics of the corresponding radiopeptides. A chelator that should be a valuable alternative to established chelating agents for 68 Ga‐radiolabeling of peptides would be a backbone‐functionalized variant of the chelator CB‐DO2A. Here, the bifunctional cross‐bridged chelating agent CB‐DO2A‐GA was developed and compared to the established chelators DOTA, NODA‐GA and DOTA‐GA. For this purpose, CB‐DO2A‐GA( t Bu) 2 was introduced into the peptide Tyr 3 ‐octreotate (TATE) and in direct comparison to the corresponding DOTA‐, NODA‐GA‐, and DOTA‐GA‐modified TATE analogs, CB‐DO2A‐GA‐TATE required harsher reaction conditions for 68 Ga‐incorporation. Regarding the hydrophilicity profile of the resulting radiopeptides, a decrease in hydrophilicity from [ 68 Ga]Ga‐DOTA‐GA‐TATE (log D (7.4) of −4.11±0.11) to [ 68 Ga]Ga‐CB‐DO2A‐GA‐TATE (−3.02±0.08) was observed. Assessing the stability against metabolic degradation and complex challenge, [ 68 Ga]Ga‐CB‐DO2A‐GA demonstrated a very high kinetic inertness, exceeding that of [ 68 Ga]Ga‐DOTA‐GA. Therefore, CB‐DO2A‐GA is a valuable alternative to established chelating agents for 68 Ga‐radiolabeling of peptides, especially when the formation of a very stable, positively charged 68 Ga‐complex is pursued.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".