The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of a Monomeric and Dimeric Radiolabeled RGD-Peptide for Tumor Targeting
Abstract
The alpha v beta 3 integrin, a transmembrane heterodimeric protein expressed on sprouting endothelial cells, binds to the arginine-glycine-aspartic acid (RGD) amino acid sequence of extracellular matrix proteins such as vitronectin. Growing malignant tumors continuously require angiogenesis. As a result, alpha v beta 3 is preferentially expressed in growing tumors and is a potential target for radiolabeled RGD-peptides. In this study we compared the tumor targeting characteristics of a monomeric radiolabeled RGD-peptide with those of a dimeric analogue. Both peptides were radiolabeled with 99mTc via the hydrazinoni-cotinamid (= HYNIC) moiety to form 99mTc-HYNIC-c(RGDfK) and 99mTc-HYNIC-E-[c(RGDfK)]2. In vitro, the IC50 showed a 10-fold higher affinity of the dimer for the alpha v beta 3 integrin as compared to the monomer (0.1 vs. 1.0 nM). In athymic female BALB/c mice with subcutaneously growing OVCAR-3 ovarian carcinoma xenografts, tumor uptake peaked at 5.8 +/- 0.7% ID/g and 5.2 +/- 0.6% ID/g for the dimer and the monomer, respectively. At 1, 2, and 4 h postinjection (p.i.) uptake of the dimer in the tumor was significantly higher than that of the monomeric analogue. Tumor-to-blood ratios were highest at 24 h p.i. at a value of 63 for both compounds. At all timepoints kidney retention of the dimer was significantly higher as compared to kidney retention of the monomer. In conclusion, in this mouse model the dimeric RGD-peptide showed better retention in the tumor than the monomeric analogue, most likely due to the bivalent interaction with the target cell. Furthermore, kidney retention of the dimeric peptide was higher than that of the monomeric peptide.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Liu, S. (2008) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2008.04.006 · Cited by 420
Liu, S. (2009) · Bioconjugate Chemistry · doi:10.1021/bc900167c · Cited by 344
Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy: An Overview
Dash, A., Chakraborty, S., Pillai, M. R. A., & Knapp, F. F. (. (2015) · Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals · doi:10.1089/cbr.2014.1741 · Cited by 128
Molecular imaging with SPECT as a tool for drug development
Gomes, C. M., Abrunhosa, A. J., Ramos, P., & Pauwels, E. K. J. (2011) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2010.09.015 · Cited by 100
Metadata
- Authors
- Janssen, M., Oyen, W. J. G., Massuger, L. F. A. G., Frielink, C., Dijkgraaf, I., Edwards, D. S., Radjopadhye, M., Corstens, F. H. M., & Boerman, O. C.
- Venue
- Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-12
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 641-646
- ISSN
- 1084-9785 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-8852
- OpenAlex
- W1996489028
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of a Monomeric and Dimeric Radiolabeled RGD-Peptide for Tumor Targeting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/108497802320970244
- The paper
- Janssen, M., Oyen, W. J. G., Massuger, L. F. A. G., Frielink, C., Dijkgraaf, I., Edwards, D. S., Radjopadhye, M., Corstens, F. H. M., & Boerman, O. C. (2002). Comparison of a Monomeric and Dimeric Radiolabeled RGD-Peptide for Tumor Targeting. Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals. https://doi.org/10.1089/108497802320970244
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.