Document Detail

(18)F-FLT-PET for Response Evaluation of MEK Inhibitor Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) in Patients with Solid Tumors.
Jump to Full Text
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  23372439     Owner:  NLM     Status:  PubMed-not-MEDLINE    
Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) is a potent, selective, uncompetitive inhibitor of MEK 1 / 2, part of the RAF/MEK/ERK protein kinase signal cascade, which is responsible for tumor. This pilot study was used to explore if (18)F-fluoro-l-thymidine (FLT), a thymidine analogue positron emission tomography (PET) tracer and a surrogate marker for proliferation, can be used as an early predictor of response for patients with solid cancers treated with Selumetinib. FLT-PET scans were performed in four patients at baseline and after 2 weeks of treatment with Selumetinib. FLT uptake in tumors was analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively by measuring standard uptake value (SUV) max in regions of interest (ROI). Results were compared to computed tomography (CT) scans (baseline and after 8 weeks), which were evaluated using the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) 1.0 criteria. One patient with melanoma showed both a qualitative and quantitative decrease in FLT uptake associated with a decrease in sum of longest diameter of 12% RECIST on CT evaluation. Another patient who had colorectal carcinoma (CRC) showed a significant increase in FLT uptake with initially stable, but eventually progressive disease on CT. The other two patients (one with melanoma and one with CRC) showed no significant changes in FLT uptake, whereas CT evaluation showed progressive disease. This is the first report describing changes in FLT-PET in patients receiving Selumetinib. In two patients, changes in FLT uptake as early as after 2 weeks of treatment were consistent with CT results after 8 weeks. Biomarkers to predict and evaluate treatment the outcome of targeted therapies are highly warranted. These initial results need further investigation.
Ingrid M E Desar; Rozemarie Gilles; Carla M L van Herpen; Anja J N H Timmer-Bonte; Mireille V Cantarini; Winette T A van der Graaf; Wim J G Oyen
Related Documents :
21660929 - Imaging of persistent left sided superior vena cava with echocardiography and multi-sli...
7301109 - Computed tomography in mitochondrial cytopathy.
21531499 - Novel ultrasound and dce-mri analyses after antiangiogenic treatment with a selective v...
20689629 - Progressive stroke-like symptoms in a patient with sporadic creutzfeldt-jakob disease.
17846199 - Decrease in the volume of white matter lesions with improvement of hepatic encephalopathy.
9507419 - Distinguishing silent lacunar infarction from enlarged virchow-robin spaces: a magnetic...
24585199 - What is the clinical value of pet/ct in the diagnosis of pulmonary nodules?
16198509 - Mapping pelvic lymph nodes: guidelines for delineation in intensity-modulated radiother...
15140169 - Morphology of the articular eminence in temporomandibular joints and condylar bone change.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  World journal of nuclear medicine     Volume:  11     ISSN:  1450-1147     ISO Abbreviation:  World J Nucl Med     Publication Date:  2012 May 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2013-02-01     Completed Date:  2013-02-04     Revised Date:  2013-05-30    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101286955     Medline TA:  World J Nucl Med     Country:  Austria    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  65-9     Citation Subset:  -    
Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Full Text
Journal Information
Journal ID (nlm-ta): World J Nucl Med
Journal ID (iso-abbrev): World J Nucl Med
Journal ID (publisher-id): WJNM
ISSN: 1450-1147
ISSN: 1607-3312
Publisher: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd, India
Article Information
Copyright: © World Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Print publication date: Season: May-Aug Year: 2012
Volume: 11 Issue: 2
First Page: 65 Last Page: 69
PubMed Id: 23372439
ID: 3555396
Publisher Id: WJNM-11-65
DOI: 10.4103/1450-1147.103413

18F-FLT-PET for Response Evaluation of MEK Inhibitor Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) in Patients with Solid Tumors
Ingrid M. E. Desaraff1
Rozemarie Gilles1
Carla M. L. van Herpenaff1
Anja (J.) N. H. Timmer-Bonteaff1
Mireille V. Cantarini2
Winette T. A. van der Graafaff1
Wim J. G. Oyen1
Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
1Department of Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
2Astra Zeneca, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, USA
Correspondence: Address for correspondence: Dr. I. M. E. Desar, Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500HB Nijmegen, Netherlands. E-mail:


The intracellular Ras-regulated Raf/MEK/ERK protein kinase signal cascade is a key pathway involved in cellular proliferation and survival. A strong correlation between deregulation of this pathway and uncontrolled cell proliferation has been demonstrated.[1] Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) is a potent, selective, uncompetitive inhibitor of MEK ½, developed as targeted therapy to treat solid cancers. A favorable toxicity, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic profile has been observed in phase I studies and phase II studies focusing on melanoma and colorectal cancer (CRC).[24] The development of targeted agents requires identification and better understanding of positive predictive biomarkers of clinical response to these agents. Currently, the CT Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) are mostly used to evaluate response.[5] These RECIST guidelines are based on the sum of one-dimensional measurements of the greatest diameter of the tumor and/or metastases.[5, 6] However, treatment with targeted therapies is cytostatic rather than cytotoxic, and can result in necrosis and cavitation without a change in lesion (or tumor) size, leading to an underestimation of therapeutic efficacy. Imaging techniques able to predict treatment outcome in an early phase of treatment are warranted. Molecular imaging may enable alternative evaluation procedures for these new drugs and enable the early change to an alternative therapy if no functional response is indicated. Recently the functional imaging technique of positron emission tomography (PET) using the radiopharmaceutical tracer 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) has been found to be a useful method for response monitoring in various malignancies.[711] However, FDG is a tracer for glucose metabolism, which does not always reflect proliferation activity. The PET agent 18F-fluoro-l-thymidine (FLT) has been introduced for imaging of cell proliferation. FLT is a thymidine analogue, which is retained in proliferating cells through the activity of the enzyme thymidine kinase-1, which is expressed during the DNA synthesis phase of the cell cycle.[12] FLT-PET has been applied for the assessment of proliferation rate in different tumors.[1318] In this pilot study, we assessed the effect of Selumetinib on tumor cell proliferation in patients with a variety of solid tumors by FLT-PET-CT and determined whether changes in FLT uptake can potentially be used as an early predictive biomarker for treatment response.

Materials and Methods

This single-institution study was conducted in conjunction with Phase I clinical trial of the capsule formulation of Selumetinib (NCT00463814) in patients with solid tumors.[2] In this study, patients with advanced solid cancer refractory to standard therapies or for whom no conventional therapies exists were treated with oral Selumetinib twice daily in a dose escalation schedule. As part of this study protocol, an evaluation CT scan was performed after every two cycles (i.e. at 8 weekly intervals of treatment with Selumetinib).

Patients participating in the FLT-PET side study had to have at least one tumor deposit of at least 2 cm outside the liver and axial skeleton. All patients gave written informed consent and both studies were approved by the local ethical committee.


FLT-PET scans were performed at baseline and after 2 weeks of treatment. The scans were performed on an integrated PET-CT scanner (Siemens/Biograph) using a static whole body protocol (hips to base of skull) 1 h after administration of 250 MBq FLT.

The FLT-PET images were analyzed both visually for any tumor targeting and quantitatively for changes in FLT uptake. Quantitative assessment was realized by drawing CT-derived 3D regions of interest (ROI) over the tumors, with both a threshold of 50% and 70% of the maximum FLT-activity via an automatic algorithm. Standardized uptake values (SUVs) were calculated using the concentration of FLT in the volume of interest (VOI) as measured by PET, divided by the injected dose per kg body weight as a normalization factor.


FLT-PET scans were analyzed by two nuclear medicine physicians. Only lesions outside of the liver and axial skeleton, with a diameter of 2 cm or more, which were also measured on CT, were evaluated. Based on two recent studies by de Langen et al. and Wahl et al., any changes in SUVmax greater than 30% were considered as significant and medically relevant, independent of day-to-day variability.[19, 20] CT scans were analyzed using the RECIST 1.0 guidelines.[6] Quantitative (mean SUVmax of measured lesions) FLT-PET results were compared with the results of the radiological evaluation with CT-scan based on RECIST 1.0 criteria.


In four patients, both baseline and follow-up FLT-PET-CTs were performed. Two patients had metastasized melanoma and two patients had advanced/metastatic CRC. One patient with melanoma showed both a qualitative and quantitative decrease in FLT uptake, correlating with a decrease in sum of diameters of 12% applying RECIST to CT evaluation [Figures 1 and 2]. Another patient who had CRC showed a significant increase in FLT uptake with initially (at 8 weeks) stable disease, but eventually progressive disease on CT. The other two patients (one with melanoma and one with CRC) showed no significant changes in FLT uptake, whereas CT evaluation showed progressive disease [Table 1].


In the new era of targeted therapies, there is a need for early identification of therapy responding and non-responding patients, in order to be able to change therapy, thereby working toward personalized medicine. Response monitoring for targeted therapies demands more specific diagnostic modalities than conventional imaging alone. Differentiation between vital tumor and fibrosis or necrosis is not possible by using morphological features as in RECIST. Furthermore, with functional and molecular imaging techniques, one could prevent a patient from unnecessarily suffering from drug side effects by differentiating responders from non-responders in an early stage of treatment.

As mentioned before, PET with FDG already has an established role in monitoring various anti-cancer therapies such as targeted therapies in malignant gastrointestinal stromal tumors.[10] This has led to the creation of the recently developed PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST).[20]

Beyond FDG, more specific imaging biomarkers for PET have been developed of which a reasonable amount is already in clinical stage like 18F-16α-17-fluoroestradiol (18F-FES), 18F-galacto-RGD, and 18F-FLT, which was used in this study.[21]

However, PET is not the only imaging modality with potential in early response monitoring in clinical oncology. Different magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) techniques for functional and molecular imaging have been developed.

One of them is dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) in which the kinetics of contrast agent inflow into the tumor after intravenous injection of the agent is followed.[22] Since tumor angiogenesis is associated with an increase in vessel permeability, this can be measured using DCE-MRI techniques.[23] Morgan et al. found that in patients treated with an anti-angiogenic vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, there were significantly greater reductions in a pharmacokinetic parameter that was related to vessel permeability in patients who showed a positive response to treatment than in those who had progressive disease.[24]

Furthermore, multimodality imaging has potential role in clinical response monitoring, whereas PET/CT and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) CT are already widely used for the evaluation of cancer.[25] However, the major drawback of these techniques is that they are combined by software and not acquired simultaneously. Recently, Judenhover et al. have performed simultaneously FLT-PET and MRI in a mouse model for colon carcinoma. This system was able to image three functional imaging techniques, PET, functional MRI, and MRS with morphological MRI.[26]

No fully statistically powered human studies on FLT-PET for cancer therapy response monitoring have been performed. Nevertheless, a possible beneficial role in therapeutic response of various solid tumors with different types of therapy have been shown,[2729] as well as the potential of using quantitative parameters for FLT uptake such as SUV.[19]

This is the first report of 18F-FLT-PET to assess the effect of the MEK inhibitor Selumetinib. In this limited study, FLT-PET-CT as an early predictor of response on Selumetinib is interesting. Further investigation of FLT-PET as a biomarker of early treatment response is needed.


Source of Support: Nil

Conflict of Interest: None declared

1. Kolch W. Meaningful relationships: The regulation of the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK pathway by protein interactionsBiochem JYear: 2000351Pt 228930511023813
2. Banerji U,Camidge DR,Verheul HM,Agarwal R,Sarker D,Kaye SB,et al. The first-in-human study of the hydrogen sulfate (Hyd-sulfate) capsule of the MEK1 / 2 inhibitor AZD6244 (ARRY-142886): A phase I open-label multicenter trial in patients with advanced cancerClin Cancer ResYear: 20101616132320179232
3. Bennouna J,Lang I,Valladares-Ayerbes M,Boer K,Adenis A,Escudero P,et al. A Phase II, open-label, randomised study to assess the efficacy and safety of the MEK1 / 2 inhibitor AZD6244 (ARRY-142886) versus capecitabine monotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer who have failed one or two prior chemotherapeutic regimensInvest New DrugsYear: 2011291021820127139
4. Kirkwood JM,Bastholt L,Robert C,Sosman J,Larkin J,Hersey P,et al. Phase II, open-label, randomized trial of the MEK1 / 2 inhibitor selumetinib as monotherapy versus temozolomide in patients with advanced melanomaClin Cancer ResYear: 2012185556722048237
5. Therasse P,Arbuck SG,Eisenhauer EA,Wanders J,Kaplan RS,Rubinstein L,et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of CanadaJ Natl Cancer InstYear: 2000922051610655437
6. Eisenhauer EA,Therasse P,Bogaerts J,Schwartz LH,Sargent D,Ford R,et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1)Eur J CancerYear: 2009452284719097774
7. Capirci C,Rampin L,Erba PA,Galeotti F,Crepaldi G,Banti E,et al. Sequential FDG-PET/CT reliably predicts response of locally advanced rectal cancer to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation therapyEur J Nucl Med Mol ImagingYear: 20073415839317503039
8. De Geus-Oei LF,van der Heijden HF,Visser EP,Hermsen R,van Hoorn BA,Timmer-Bonte JN,et al. Chemotherapy response evaluation with 18F-FDG PET in patients with non-small cell lung cancerJ Nucl MedYear: 2007481592817873138
9. De Geus-Oei LF,van Laarhoven HW,Visser EP,Hermsen R,van Hoorn BA,Kamm YJ,et al. Chemotherapy response evaluation with FDG-PET in patients with colorectal cancerAnn OncolYear: 2008193485217962202
10. Gayed I,Vu T,Iyer R,Johnson M,Macapinlac H,Swanston N,et al. The role of 18F-FDG PET in staging and early prediction of response to therapy of recurrent gastrointestinal stromal tumorsJ Nucl MedYear: 200445172114734662
11. Schwarz JK,Siegel BA,Dehdashti F,Grigsby PW. Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinomaJAMAYear: 200729822899518029833
12. Shields AF,Grierson JR,Dohmen BM,Machulla HJ,Stayanoff JC,Lawhorn-Crews JM,et al. Imaging proliferation in vivo with [F-18]FLT and positron emission tomographyNat MedYear: 19984133469809561
13. Apisarnthanarax S,Alauddin MM,Mourtada F,Ariga H,Raju U,Mawlawi O,et al. Early detection of chemoradioresponse in esophageal carcinoma by 3’-deoxy-3’- 3H-fluorothymidine using preclinical tumor modelsClin Cancer ResYear: 2006124590716899606
14. Buck AK,Bommer M,Stilgenbauer S,Juweid M,Glatting G,Schirrmeister H,et al. Molecular imaging of proliferation in malignant lymphomaCancer ResYear: 200666110556117108145
15. Francis DL,Visvikis D,Costa DC,Arulampalam TH,Ownsend C,Luthra SK,et al. Potential impact of [18F]3’- deoxy-3’- fluorothymidine versus [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in positron emission tomography for colorectal cancerEur J Nucl Med Mol ImagingYear: 2003309889412739071
16. Seitz U,Wagner M,Neumaier B,Wawra E,Glatting G,Leder G,et al. Evaluation of pyrimidine metabolising enzymes and in vitro uptake of 3’- [(18)F]fluoro-3’- deoxythymidine ([(18)F]FLT) in pancreatic cancer cell linesEur J Nucl Med Mol ImagingYear: 20022911748112192562
17. Van Westreenen HL,Cobben DC,Jager PL,van Dullemen HM,Wesseling J,Elsinga PH,et al. Comparison of 18F-FLT PET and 18F-FDG PET in esophageal cancerJ Nucl MedYear: 200546400415750150
18. Vesselle H,Grierson J,Muzi M,Pugsley JM,Schmidt RA,Rabinowitz P,et al. In vivo validation of 3‘deoxy-3’- [(18)F]fluorothymidine ([(18)F]FLT) as a proliferation imaging tracer in humans: Correlation of [(18)F]FLT uptake by positron emission tomography with Ki-67 immunohistochemistry and flow cytometry in human lung tumorsClin Cancer ResYear: 2002833152312429617
19. De Langen AJ,Klabbers B,Lubberink M,Boellaard R,Spreeuwenberg MD,Slotman BJ,et al. Reproducibility of quantitative 18F-3’- deoxy-3’- fluorothymidine measurements using positron emission tomographyEur J Nucl Med Mol ImagingYear: 2009363899518931838
20. Wahl RL,Jacene H,Kasamon Y,Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumorsJ Nucl MedYear: 200950122S50S19403881
21. Seaman ME,Contino G,Bardeesy N,Kelly KA. Molecular imaging agents: Impact on diagnosis and therapeutics in oncologyExpert Rev Mol MedYear: 201012e2020633310
22. Leach MO,Brindle KM,Evelhoch JL,Griffiths JR,Horsman MR,Jackson A,et al. The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: Issues and recommendationsBr J CancerYear: 200592159961015870830
23. McDonald DM,Choyke PL. Imaging of angiogenesis: From microscope to clinicNat MedYear: 200397132512778170
24. Morgan B,Thomas AL,Drevs J,Hennig J,Buchert M,Jivan A,et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a biomarker for the pharmacological response of PTK787/ZK 222584, an inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, in patients with advanced colorectal cancer and liver metastases: Results from two phase I studiesJ Clin OncolYear: 20032139556414517187
25. Bockisch A,Freudenberg LS,Schmidt D,Kuwert T. Hybrid imaging by SPECT/CT and PET/CT: Proven outcomes in cancer imagingSemin Nucl MedYear: 2009392768919497404
26. Judenhofer MS,Wehrl HF,Newport DF,Catana C,Siegel SB,Becker M,et al. Simultaneous PET-MRI: A new approach for functional and morphological imagingNat MedYear: 2008144596518376410
27. Chen W,Delaloye S,Silverman DH,Geist C,Czernin J,Sayre J,et al. Predicting treatment response of malignant gliomas to bevacizumab and irinotecan by imaging proliferation with [18F] fluorothymidine positron emission tomography: A pilot studyJ Clin OncolYear: 20072547142117947718
28. Herrmann K,Wieder HA,Buck AK,Schöffel M,Krause BJ,Fend F,et al. Early response assessment using 3’- deoxy-3’- [18F]fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography in high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphomaClin Cancer ResYear: 2007133552817575218
29. Sohn HJ,Yang YJ,Ryu JS,Oh SJ,Im KC,Moon DH,et al. [18F]Fluorothymidine positron emission tomography before and 7 days after gefitinib treatment predicts response in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lungClin Cancer ResYear: 2008147423919010859


[Figure ID: F1]
Figure 1 

F-18 FLT PET/CT scan. Coronal images: (a) Before treatment and (b) after treatment. A female patient with pleural metastases of a melanoma, showing decreased FLT uptake in the pleural metastases after treatment with Selumetinib for 2 weeks (Patient No. 1) [Table 1]

[Figure ID: F2]
Figure 2 

F-18 FLT PET/CT scan. Transaxial images: (a) Before treatment and (b) after treatment. A female patient with pleural metastases of a melanoma, showing decreased FLT uptake in the pleural metastases after treatment with Selumetinib for 2 weeks (Patient No. 1) [Table 1]

[TableWrap ID: T1] Table 1 

Changes in mean SUVmax compared to CT changes according to RECIST after Selumetinib therapy in four patients with metastatic melanoma or metastatic colorectal carcinoma

Article Categories:
  • Original Article

Keywords: F-18 FLT, PET-CT, Selumetinib, treatment response.

Previous Document:  Observed influence of nitroglycerine on myocardial perfusion scintigraphy in patients with multiple ...
Next Document:  Monte carlo study of the effect of collimator thickness on T-99m source response in single photon em...