Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23359657›Full record

ArticleJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine2013

Assessment of cellular proliferation in tumors by PET using 18F-ISO-1.

Farrokh Dehdashti, Richard Laforest, Feng Gao, Kooresh I Shoghi, Rebecca L Aft, Brian Nussenbaum, Friederike H Kreisel, Nancy L Bartlett, Amanda Cashen, Nina Wagner-Johnston and 2 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Radiopharmaceuticals and their applications in medicine.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Novel applications of molecular imaging to guide breast cancer therapy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022
    Review
  10. Screening of σJournal of medicinal chemistry · 2022
    Article
  11. Discovery and development of brain-penetrantActa pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Breast CancerJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2020
    Article
  19. Approaches to PET Imaging of Glioblastoma.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    Wagner-Johnson, Nina [corrected to Wagner-Johnston, Nina]
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Farrokh DehdashtiDivision of Nuclear Medicine and Radiological Sciences, Edward Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri 63110, USA. dehdashtif@mir.wustl.edu
Richard Laforest
Feng Gao
Kooresh I Shoghi
Rebecca L Aft
Brian Nussenbaum
Friederike H Kreisel
Nancy L Bartlett
Amanda Cashen
Nina Wagner-Johnston
Nina Wagner-Johnson
Robert H Mach
Alvin J. Siteman Cancer CenterWashington University in St. Louis · USMallinckrodt (United States) · US

Funding

Washington University Center for Cellular ImagingP30CA091842 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TIMOTHY J. EBERLEIN · 2001 to 2026
$128.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA091842
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThis first study in humans was designed to evaluate the safety and dosimetry of a cellular proliferative marker, N-(4-(6,7-dimethoxy-3,4-dihydroisoquinolin-2(1H)-yl)butyl)-2-(2-(18)F-fluoroethoxy)-5-methylbenzamide ((18)F-ISO-1), and evaluate the feasibility of imaging tumor proliferation by PET in patients with newly diagnosed malignant neoplasms.

methodsPatients with biopsy-proven lymphoma, breast cancer, or head and neck cancer underwent (18)F-ISO-1 PET. Tumor (18)F-ISO-1 uptake was assessed semiquantitatively by maximum standardized uptake value, ratios of tumor to normal tissue and tumor to muscle, and relative distribution volume ratio. The PET results were correlated with tumor Ki-67 and mitotic index, from in vitro assays of the tumor tissue. The biodistribution of (18)F-ISO-1 and human dosimetry were evaluated.

resultsThirty patients with primary breast cancer (n = 13), head and neck cancer (n = 10), and lymphoma (n = 7) were evaluated. In the entire group, tumor maximum standardized uptake value and tumor-to-muscle ratio correlated significantly with Ki-67 (τ = 0.27, P = 0.04, and τ = 0.38, P = 0.003, respectively), but no significant correlation was observed between Ki-67 and tumor-to-normal-tissue ratio (τ = 0.07, P = 0.56) or distribution volume ratio (τ = 0.26, P = 0.14). On the basis of whole-body PET data, the gallbladder is the dose-limiting organ, with an average radiation dose of 0.091 mGy/MBq. The whole-body and effective doses were 0.012 mGy/MBq and 0.016 mSv/MBq, respectively. No adverse effects of (18)F-ISO-1 were encountered.

conclusionThe presence of a significant correlation between (18)F-ISO-1 and Ki-67 makes this agent promising for evaluation of the proliferative status of solid tumors. The relatively small absorbed doses to normal organs allow for the safe administration of up to 550 MBq, which is sufficient for PET imaging in clinical trials.

Indexed as

Cell ProliferationPositron-Emission TomographyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBenzamidesBreast NeoplasmsFemaleFluorine RadioisotopesHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansKi-67 AntigenLymphomaMaleMiddle AgedMitotic IndexBenzamidesFluorine RadioisotopesKi-67 AntigenRadiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID23359657
PMCPMC3694753
OpenAlexW2125251995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.