A modeling analysis of the effects of molecular size and binding affinity on tumor targeting

A diverse array of tumor targeting agents ranging in size from peptides to nanoparticles is currently under development for applications in cancer imaging and therapy. However, it remains largely unclear how size differences among these molecules influence their targeting properties. Here, we develop a simple, mechanistic model that can be used to understand and predict the complex interplay between molecular size, affinity, and tumor uptake. Empirical relationships between molecular radius and capillary permeability, interstitial diffusivity, available volume fraction, and plasma clearance were obtained using data in the literature. These relationships were incorporated into a compartmental model of tumor targeting using MATLAB to predict the magnitude, specificity, time dependence, and affinity dependence of tumor uptake for molecules across a broad size spectrum. In the typical size range for proteins, the model uncovers a complex trend in which intermediate-sized targeting agents (MW, ∼25 kDa) have the lowest tumor uptake, whereas higher tumor uptake levels are achieved by smaller and larger agents. Small peptides accumulate rapidly in the tumor but require high affinity to be retained, whereas larger proteins can achieve similar retention with >100-fold weaker binding. For molecules in the size range of liposomes, the model predicts that antigen targeting will not significantly increase tumor uptake relative to untargeted molecules. All model predictions are shown to be consistent with experimental observations from published targeting studies. The results and techniques have implications for drug development, imaging, and therapeutic dosing. [Mol Cancer Ther 2009;8(10):2861–71]

[1]  H. Maeda,et al.  Exploiting the enhanced permeability and retention effect for tumor targeting. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[2]  R. Begent,et al.  Mathematical model of antibody targeting: important parameters defined using clinical data. , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  J. Chatal,et al.  Antibody pretargeting advances cancer radioimmunodetection and radioimmunotherapy. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  R. B. Campbell,et al.  Role of tumor–host interactions in interstitial diffusion of macromolecules: Cranial vs. subcutaneous tumors , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  M. Ferrari Cancer nanotechnology: opportunities and challenges , 2005, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[6]  Andreas Plückthun,et al.  PEGylation and Multimerization of the Anti-p185HER-2 Single Chain Fv Fragment 4D5 , 2006, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[7]  Judit Erchegyi,et al.  Radiolabeled somatostatin receptor antagonists are preferable to agonists for in vivo peptide receptor targeting of tumors , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  U. Nielsen,et al.  Antibody targeting of long-circulating lipidic nanoparticles does not increase tumor localization but does increase internalization in animal models. , 2006, Cancer research.

[9]  Robert Langer,et al.  Precise engineering of targeted nanoparticles by using self-assembled biointegrated block copolymers , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Christilyn P. Graff,et al.  Theoretical analysis of antibody targeting of tumor spheroids: importance of dosage for penetration, and affinity for retention. , 2003, Cancer research.

[11]  W. Deen,et al.  Structural determinants of glomerular permeability. , 2001, American journal of physiology. Renal physiology.

[12]  P. L. Paine,et al.  Drag coefficients for the movement of rigid spheres through liquid-filled cylindrical pores. , 1975, Biophysical journal.

[13]  A. Karlström,et al.  (99m)Tc-maEEE-Z(HER2:342), an Affibody molecule-based tracer for the detection of HER2 expression in malignant tumors. , 2007, Bioconjugate chemistry.

[14]  S. Ross,et al.  Imaging tumors with an albumin-binding Fab, a novel tumor-targeting agent. , 2007, Cancer research.

[15]  S. Kanoh,et al.  Polysaccharides as drug carriers: biodisposition of fluorescein-labeled dextrans in mice. , 1997, Biological & pharmaceutical bulletin.

[16]  Michael M. Schmidt,et al.  Kinetics of anti-carcinoembryonic antigen antibody internalization: effects of affinity, bivalency, and stability , 2008, Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy.

[17]  G. Griffiths,et al.  Intracellular processing of 99Tcm-antibody conjugates. , 1998, Nuclear medicine communications.

[18]  A. Wu,et al.  Biodistribution and radioimmunotherapy of human breast cancer xenografts with radiometal-labeled DOTA conjugated anti-HER2/neu antibody 4D5. , 2000, Bioconjugate chemistry.

[19]  M. Dewhirst,et al.  Tumor vascular permeability, accumulation, and penetration of macromolecular drug carriers. , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[20]  T. Jackson,et al.  Mathematical and experimental analysis of localization of anti-tumour antibody–enzyme conjugates , 1999, British Journal of Cancer.

[21]  L E Williams,et al.  Numerical selection of optimal tumor imaging agents with application to engineered antibodies. , 2001, Cancer biotherapy & radiopharmaceuticals.

[22]  E. Yamada THE FINE STRUCTURE OF THE RENAL GLOMERULUS OF THE MOUSE , 1955, The Journal of biophysical and biochemical cytology.

[23]  J. Carlsson,et al.  Tumor imaging using a picomolar affinity HER2 binding affibody molecule. , 2006, Cancer research.

[24]  D. Pressman,et al.  Plasma and Blood Volumes of Mouse Organs, As Determined with Radioactive Iodoproteins.∗ , 1950, Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine. Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine.

[25]  I. Bernstein,et al.  Comparative metabolism and retention of iodine-125, yttrium-90, and indium-111 radioimmunoconjugates by cancer cells. , 1996, Cancer research.

[26]  Y. Ikada,et al.  Prolongation of the serum half-life period of superoxide dismutase by poly(ethylene glycol) modification , 1997 .

[27]  A. Karlström,et al.  99mTc-chelator engineering to improve tumour targeting properties of a HER2-specific Affibody molecule , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[28]  A. Plückthun,et al.  Tumor Targeting of Mono-, Di-, and Tetravalent Anti-p185HER-2 Miniantibodies Multimerized by Self-associating Peptides* , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[29]  P. Hudson,et al.  Engineered antibody fragments and the rise of single domains , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[30]  Michael M. Schmidt,et al.  Factors determining antibody distribution in tumors. , 2008, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[31]  R. Jain,et al.  Pore and fiber-matrix models for diffusive transport in normal and neoplastic tissues. , 1984, Microvascular research.

[32]  M. Dewhirst,et al.  Available volume fraction of macromolecules in the extravascular space of a fibrosarcoma: implications for drug delivery. , 1999, Cancer research.

[33]  Wolfgang A. Weber,et al.  Impact of tumor-specific targeting on the biodistribution and efficacy of siRNA nanoparticles measured by multimodality in vivo imaging , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[34]  Andreas Plückthun,et al.  A designed ankyrin repeat protein evolved to picomolar affinity to Her2. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[35]  E. Ward,et al.  Transcytosis and catabolism of antibody , 2002, Immunologic research.

[36]  T. Allen Ligand-targeted therapeutics in anticancer therapy , 2002, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[37]  K R Godfrey,et al.  Effect of dose, molecular size, affinity, and protein binding on tumor uptake of antibody or ligand: a biomathematical model. , 1989, Cancer research.

[38]  G. Adams,et al.  High affinity restricts the localization and tumor penetration of single-chain fv antibody molecules. , 2001, Cancer research.

[39]  R K Jain,et al.  Transport of fluid and macromolecules in tumors. III. Role of binding and metabolism. , 1991 .

[40]  P. Caliceti,et al.  Pharmacokinetic and biodistribution properties of poly(ethylene glycol)-protein conjugates. , 2003, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[41]  E. Gillette,et al.  Morphometric analyses of the microvasculature of tumors during growth and after x‐irradiation , 1974, Cancer.

[42]  R. Jain,et al.  Delivery of molecular and cellular medicine to solid tumors. , 1998, Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society.

[43]  W. Deen,et al.  Effects of plasma proteins on sieving of tracer macromolecules in glomerular basement membrane. , 2001, American journal of physiology. Renal physiology.

[44]  R K Jain,et al.  Vascular permeability in a human tumor xenograft: molecular size dependence and cutoff size. , 1995, Cancer research.

[45]  F. Curry,et al.  Microvascular permeability. , 1999, Physiological reviews.

[46]  S. Kneifel,et al.  [Lys40(Ahx-DTPA-111In)NH2]-Exendin-4 Is a Highly Efficient Radiotherapeutic for Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor–Targeted Therapy for Insulinoma , 2007, Clinical Cancer Research.

[47]  K. Dane Wittrup,et al.  Theoretic Criteria for Antibody Penetration into Solid Tumors and Micrometastases , 2007, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[48]  Min Zhao,et al.  Serial determination of glomerular filtration rate in conscious mice using FITC-inulin clearance. , 2004, American journal of physiology. Renal physiology.

[49]  M. Sliwkowski,et al.  Endocytosis and sorting of ErbB2 and the site of action of cancer therapeutics trastuzumab and geldanamycin. , 2004, Molecular biology of the cell.

[50]  Alastair H Kyle,et al.  Direct Visualization of Heterogeneous Extravascular Distribution of Trastuzumab in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Type 2 Overexpressing Xenografts , 2008, Clinical Cancer Research.

[51]  R K Jain,et al.  Transport of fluid and macromolecules in tumors. I. Role of interstitial pressure and convection. , 1989, Microvascular research.

[52]  R. Jain Delivery of molecular and cellular medicine to solid tumors. , 2001, Advanced drug delivery reviews.