Cancer Research Infection and Cancer: Biology, Therapeutics, and Prevention
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

[Cancer Research 50, 873s-876s, February 1, 1990]
© 1990 American Association for Cancer Research

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Laborda, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hoffman, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Laborda, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hoffman, T.

Comparative Pharmacokinetics of a Murine Monoclonal Antibody to a Rat Colon Tumor in Rats and Nude Mice1

Jorge Laborda, Jean-Yves Douillard, Elaine F. Lizzio and Thomas Hoffman

Laboratory of Cell Biology, Division of Blood and Blood Products, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Bethesda, Maryland 20892

The pharmacokinetics of the 131I-labeled murine anti-rat colon carcinoma monoclonal antibody, E4, and its F(ab')2 fragments were compared in normal Sprague-Dawley rats as well as in syngeneic BDIX rats and nude mice bearing the tumor to which the monoclonal antibodies had been generated. 125I-labeled irrelevant antibody of the same IgG2a subclass or its labeled F(ab')2 fragments were used as controls. Results of labeled antibody uptake after i.v. administration were analyzed in terms of accumulation and localization indices for normal tissues and tumor. Whole E4, which is tumor specific by immunoperoxidase staining, bound to a variety of normal tissues, in addition to the tumor. These tissues included liver, stomach, colon, and lung of rats bearing s.c. tumors. Targeting to the tumor was better in rats bearing i.p. tumors, but targeting to other organs was also high. The use of F(ab')2 fragments in rats bearing s.c. tumors showed results similar to those found with the whole antibody and did not improve tumor localization. These observations demonstrate a lack of correlation between in vivo tissue uptake of injected murine monoclonals, or their fragments, and in vitro histochemical studies. In contrast to observations in rats, tumor alone was specifically targeted with whole E4 or F(ab')2 fragments in tumor-bearing nude mice. Trichloroacetic acid precipitation of rat and mouse tissue radioactivity indicated that labeled antibody, and not catabolites or free iodine, was being measured. These data suggest that studies on the xenogeneic nude mouse model may not necessarily be relevant to the choice of monoclonal antibodies for clinical diagnostic imaging or therapy.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 1990 by the American Association for Cancer Research.