Head-to-head comparison of the hybrid tracer indocyanine green-99mTc-nanocolloid with 99mTc-Senti-Scint using sentinel node lymphoscintigraphy and single-photon emission computed tomography combined with computer tomography in melanoma

Comparison of two hybrid sentinel node tracers: indocyanine green (ICG)-99mTc-nanocolloid vs. ICG-99mTc-nanoscan from a nuclear medicine and surgical perspective

BACKGROUND

Lymph node (LN) metastasis is a relevant predictor for survival in patients with a.o. penile cancer (PeCa), malignant melanoma. The sentinel node (SN) procedure comprises targeted resection of the first tumour-draining SNs. Here, the hybrid tracer indocyanine green (ICG)-99mTc-nanocolloid has been used for several years to combine optical and nuclear detection. Recently, the resource of the nanocolloid precursor stopped production and the precursor was replaced by a different but chemically comparable colloid, nanoscan. Our aim was to study the performance of ICG-99mTc-nanoscan compared to ICG-99mTc-nanocolloid from a nuclear and surgical perspective.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients with either PeCa or head-and-neck (H&N) melanoma and scheduled for a SN procedure were included. The initial group (n = 11) received ICG-99mTc-nanocolloid until no longer available; the second group (n = 13) received ICG-99mTc-nanoscan. Tracer uptake was assessed on lymphoscintigraphy and single-photon emission (SPECT). Intraoperatively, SNs were identified using gamma tracing and fluorescence imaging. Ex vivo (back-table) measurements were conducted to quantify the fluorescence emissions. Chemical analysis was performed to compare the ICG assembly on both precursors.

RESULTS

The mean tracer uptake in the SNs was similar for ICG-99mTc-nanocolloid (2.2 ± 4.3%ID) and ICG-99mTc-nanoscan (1.8 ± 2.6%ID; p = 0.68). 3 SNs (interquartile range (IQR) 3-4) were detected on lymphoscintigraphy in PeCa patients receiving ICG-99mTc-nanoscan compared to 2 SNs (IQR 2-3) in PeCa patients receiving ICG-99mTc-nanocolloid (p = 0.045), no differences were observed in H&N patients. Back-table measurements of resected SNs revealed a lower total fluorescence intensity in the ICG-99mTc-nanoscan group (24*109 arbitrary units (A.U) IQR 1.6*109-14*109 in the ICG-99mTc-nanocolloid group versus 4.6*109 A.U. IQR 2.4*109-42*109 in the ICG-99mTc-nanoscan group, p = 0.0054). This was consistent with a larger degree of "stacked" ICG observed in the nanoscan formulation. No tracer-related adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this retrospective analysis, we can conclude that ICG-99mTc-nanoscan has similar capacity for SN identification as ICG-99mTc-nanocolloid and can safely be implemented in SN procedures.

Nanoparticles labeled with gamma-emitting radioisotopes: an attractive approach for in vivo tracking using SPECT imaging

Providing accurate molecular imaging of the body and biological process is critical for diagnosing disease and personalizing treatment with the minimum side effects. Recently, diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals have gained more attention in precise molecular imaging due to their high sensitivity and appropriate tissue penetration depth. The fate of these radiopharmaceuticals throughout the body can be traced using nuclear imaging systems, including single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) modalities. In this regard, nanoparticles are attractive platforms for delivering radionuclides into targets because they can directly interfere with the cell membranes and subcellular organelles. Moreover, applying radiolabeled nanomaterials can decrease their toxicity concerns because radiopharmaceuticals are usually administrated at low doses. Therefore, incorporating gamma-emitting radionuclides into nanomaterials can provide imaging probes with valuable additional properties compared to the other carriers. Herein, we aim to review (1) the gamma-emitting radionuclides used for labeling different nanomaterials, (2) the approaches and conditions adopted for their radiolabeling, and (3) their application. This study can help researchers to compare different radiolabeling methods in terms of stability and efficiency and choose the best way for each nanosystem.