Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative imaging of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products in prostate cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Current screening and monitoring of prostate cancer (PCa) is insufficient, producing inaccurate diagnoses. Presence of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products (RAGE) is associated with signature characteristics of PCa development such as cell proliferation, anchorage-independent growth, angiogenesis, migration, invasion, and poor patient survival. Therefore, we developed a preclinical multimodal imaging strategy targeted at RAGE to diagnose and monitor PCa.

Methods

In this work, RAGE-targeted multimodal nanoparticles (64Cu-Cy5-G4-CML) were synthesized and rendered functional for nuclear and optical imaging using previously established methods. The probe’s binding affinity and targeting specificity was assessed in androgen-dependent (LNCaP) and androgen-independent (DU145) prostate cancer cells using flow cytometry and confocal microscopy. In vivo PET-CT imaging was used to evaluate RAGE levels in DU145 and LNCaP xenograft models in mice. Then, tumors were excised post-imaging for histological staining and autoradiography to further assess RAGE levels and targeting efficiency of the tracer. Finally, RAGE levels from human PCa samples of varying Gleason Scores were evaluated using Western blot and immunohistochemical staining.

Results

PCa cell culture studies confirmed adequate RAGE-targeting with 64Cu-Cy5-G4-CML with KD between 360 and 540 nM as measured by flow cytometry. In vivo PET-CT images of PCa xenografts revealed favorable kinetics, rapid blood clearance, and a non-homogenous, enhanced uptake in tumors, which varied based on cell type and tumor size with mean uptake between 0.5 and 1.4%ID/g. RAGE quantification of human samples confirmed increased RAGE uptake corresponding to increased Gleason scoring.

Conclusions

Our study has shown that RAGE-targeted cancer imaging is feasible and could significantly impact PCa management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

PCa:

Prostate cancer

LPCa:

Localized prostate cancer

AS:

Active surveillance

DRE:

Digital rectal exam

PSA:

Prostate-specific antigen

RAGE:

Receptor for advanced glycation end-product

AGE:

Advanced glycation end-products

PET:

Positron emission tomography

CT:

Computed tomography

PAMAM:

Polyamidoamine

DU145:

Human prostate cancer cell line

LNCaP:

Lymph node carcinoma of the prostate

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(1):7–30. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21442.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, Boston B, Busby JE, D’Amico AV, et al. Prostate cancer, version 3.2012: Featured updates to the NCCN Guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012:1081–7.

  3. Bastian PJ, Carter BH, Bjartell A, Seitz M, Stanislaus P, Montorsi F, et al. Insignificant prostate cancer and active surveillance: from definition to clinical implications. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1321–32.

  4. Mishra MV, Bridges JFP. Factors that influence patient preferences for prostate cancer management options : a systematic review. 2015;899:–911.

  5. Walsh PC. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1291–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brett J. The receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE) is a cellular binding site for amphoterin. J Biol Chem. 1995;270(43):25752–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sugaya K, Fukagawa T, Matsumoto K, Mita K, Takahashi E, Ando A, et al. Three genes in the human MHC class III region near the junction with the class II: gene for receptor of advanced glycosylation end products, PBX2 homeobox gene and a notch homolog, human counterpart of mouse mammary tumor gene int-3. Genomics. 1994; 23(2):408–19.

  8. Sparvero LJ, Asafu-Adjei D, Kang R, Tang D, Amin N, Im J, et al. RAGE (receptor for advanced glycation endproducts), RAGE ligands, and their role in cancer and inflammation. J Transl Med. 2009;7:17.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Ishiguro H, Nakaigawa N, Miyoshi Y, Fujinami K, Kubota Y, Uemura H. Receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE) and its ligand, amphoterin are overexpressed and associated with prostate cancer development. Prostate. 2005;64(1):92–100.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhao C, Bao J, Lu Y, Zhao T, Zhou X, Zheng D, et al. Co-expression of RAGE and HMGB1 is associated with cancer progression and poor patient outcome of prostate cancer. Am J Cancer Res. 2014;4(4):369–77.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Pinkas A, Aschner M. Advanced glycation end-products and their receptors: related pathologies, recent therapeutic strategies, and a potential model for future neurodegeneration studies. Chem Res Toxicol. 2016;29:707–14.

  12. Lesniak WG, Kariapper MST, Nair BM, Tan W, Hutson A, Balogh LP, et al. Synthesis and characterization of PAMAM dendrimer-based multifunctional nanodevices for targeting alphavbeta3 integrins. Bioconjug Chem. 2007;18(4):1148–54.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Mezentsev AV, Bruskin SA, Soboleva AG, Sobolev VV, Piruzian ES. Pharmacological control of receptor of advanced glycation end-products and its biological effects in psoriasis. Int J Biomed Sci. 2013;9(3):112–22.

  14. Elangovan I, Thirugnanam S, Chen A, Zheng G, Bosland MC, Kajdacsy-Balla A, et al. Targeting receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE) expression induces apoptosis and inhibits prostate tumor growth. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2012;417(4):1133–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2011.12.060.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bongarzone S, Savickas V, Luzi F, Gee AD. Targeting the receptor for advanced glycation endproducts (RAGE): a medicinal chemistry perspective. J Med Chem. 2017;60(17):7213–32.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Konopka CJ, Wozniak M, Hedhli J, Ploska A, Schwartz-Duval A, Siekierzycka A, et al. Multimodal imaging of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products with molecularly targeted nanoparticles. Theranostics. 2018;8(18):5012–24.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Drake LR, PJH S. Targeted nanoparticles for multimodal imaging of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products. Theranostics. 2018;8(22):6352–4.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Danhier F, Feron O, Préat V. To exploit the tumor microenvironment: passive and active tumor targeting of nanocarriers for anti-cancer drug delivery. J Control Release. 2010;148:135–46.

  19. Labieniec-Watala M, Watala C. PAMAM dendrimers: destined for success or doomed to fail? Plain and modified PAMAM dendrimers in the context of biomedical applications. J Pharm Sci. 2015;104(1):2–14.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cary BP, Brooks AF, Fawaz MV, Drake LR, Desmond TJ, Sherman P, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of [(18)F]RAGER: a first generation small-molecule PET radioligand targeting the receptor for advanced glycation endproducts. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2016;7(3):391–8.

  21. Fang Y-HD, Lin C-Y, Shih M-J, Wang H-M, Ho T-Y, Liao C-T, et al. Development and evaluation of an open-source software package "CGITA" for quantifying tumor heterogeneity with molecular images. Biomed Res Int. 2014, 2014:248505.

  22. de Hoon MJL, Imoto S, Nolan J, Miyano S. Open source clustering software. Bioinformatics. 2004;20(9):1453–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Horoszewicz JS, Leong SS, Kawinski E, Karr JP, Rosenthal H, Chu TM, et al. LNCaP model of human prostatic carcinoma LNCaP model of human prostatic carcinoma1. 1983;(April):1809–18.

  24. Stone KR, Mickey DD, Wunderli H, Mickey GH, Paulson DF. Isolation of a human prostate carcinoma cell line (DU 145). Int J Cancer. 1978;21(3):274–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.2910210305.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gilda JE, Gomes AV. Western blotting using in-gel protein labeling as a normalization control: stain-free technology. New York: Humana Press; 2015. p. 381–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2550-6_27.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Gordetsky J, Epstein J. Grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma: current state and prognostic implications. Diagn Pathol. 2016;11:25.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Malik P, Chaudhry N, Mittal R, Mukherjee TK. Role of receptor for advanced glycation end products in the complication and progression of various types of cancers. Biochim Biophys Acta - Gen Subj. 2015;1850(9):1898–904.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Nasser MW, Wani NA, Ahirwar DK, Powell CA, Ravi J, Elbaz M, et al. RAGE mediates S100A7-induced breast cancer growth and metastasis by modulating the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Res. 2015;75(6):974–85

  29. Kuniyasu H, Oue N, Wakikawa A, Shigeishi H, Matsutani N, Kuraoka K, et al. Expression of receptors for advanced glycation end-products (RAGE) is closely associated with the invasive and metastatic activity of gastric cancer. J Pathol. 2002;196(2):163–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Heijmans J, Büller NVJA, Hoff E, Dihal AA, van der Poll T, van Zoelen MAD, et al. Rage signalling promotes intestinal tumourigenesis Oncogene 2012;(November 2011):1–5.

  31. Hiwatashi K, Ueno S, Abeyama K, Kubo F, Sakoda M, Maruyama I, et al. A novel function of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products (RAGE) in association with tumorigenesis and tumor differentiation of HCC. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(3):923–33

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Arumugam T, Ramachandran V, Gomez SB, Schmidt AM, Logsdon CD. S100P-derived RAGE antagonistic peptide reduces tumor growth and metastasis. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(16):4356–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bennmann D, Kannicht C, Fisseau C, Jacobs K, Navarette-Santos A, Hofmann B, et al. Glycation of the high affinity NGF-receptor and RAGE leads to reduced ligand affinity. Mech Ageing Dev. 2015;150:1–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Litwinoff E, Hurtado Del Pozo C, Ramasamy R, Schmidt AM. Emerging targets for therapeutic development in diabetes and its complications: the RAGE signaling pathway. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015;98(2):135–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Di Pino A, Francesca U, Maria ZR, Agnese F, Di Mauro S, Piro S, et al. Low endogenous secretory RAGE levels are associated with inflammation and carotid atherosclerosis in pre-diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101(4):1701–9.

  36. de Haan JJ, Smeets MB, Pasterkamp G, Arslan F. Danger signals in the initiation of the inflammatory response after myocardial infarction. Mediators Inflamm. 2013;2013:206039.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Walker D, Lue LF, Paul G, Patel A, Sabbagh MN. Receptor for advanced glycation endproduct modulators: a new therapeutic target in Alzheimer’s disease. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2015;24(3):393–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Tekabe Y, Luma J, Li Q, Schmidt AM, Ramasamy R, Johnson LL. Imaging of receptors for advanced glycation end products in experimental myocardial ischemia and reperfusion injury. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5(1):59–67.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Tekabe Y, Kollaros M, Li C, Zhang G, Schmidt AM, Johnson L. Imaging receptor for advanced glycation end product expression in mouse model of hind limb ischemia. EJNMMI Res. 2013;3(1):37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Tekabe Y, Luma J, Einstein AJ, Sedlar M, Li Q, Schmidt AM, et al. A novel monoclonal antibody for RAGE-directed imaging identifies accelerated atherosclerosis in diabetes. J Nucl Med. 2010;51(1):92–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Wibmer A, Hricak H, Gondo T, Matsumoto K, Veeraraghavan H, Fehr D, et al. Haralick texture analysis of prostate MRI: utility for differentiating non-cancerous prostate from prostate cancer and differentiating prostate cancers with different Gleason scores. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(10):2840–50.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Daniel M, Kuess P, Andrzejewski P, Nyholm T, Helbich T, Polanec S, et al. Impact of androgen deprivation therapy on apparent diffusion coefficient and T2w MRI for histogram and texture analysis with respect to focal radiotherapy of prostate cancer. Strahlentherapie und Onkol. 2018:1–10.

  43. Bates A, Miles K. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET/MRI validation of MR textural analysis for detection of transition zone prostate cancer. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(12):5290–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4877-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ha S, Park S, Bang JI, Kim EK, Lee HY. Metabolic radiomics for pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT to characterize locally advanced breast cancer: histopathologic characteristics, response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and prognosis. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1556.

  45. Meigs JB, Barry MJ, Oesterling JE, Jacobsen SJ. Interpreting results of prostate-specific antigen testing for early detection of prostate cancer. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11(9):505–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR, Hudson MA, Scardino PT, Flanigan RC, et al. Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: results of a multicenter clinical trial of 6,630 men. J Urol. 1994;151(5):1283–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ankerst DP, Till C, Boeck A, Goodman P, Tangen CM, Feng Z, et al. The impact of prostate volume, number of biopsy cores and American Urological Association symptom score on the sensitivity of cancer detection using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator. J Urol. 2013;190(1):70–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Fenton JJ, Weyrich MS, Durbin S, Liu Y, Bang H, Melnikow J. Prostate-specific antigen–based screening for prostate cancer. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1914.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Stark JR, Perner S, Stampfer MJ, Sinnott JA, Finn S, Eisenstein AS, et al. Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3? J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(21):3459–64. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.4669.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Yang DD, Mahal BA, Muralidhar V, Nezolosky MD, Vastola ME, Labe SA, et al. Risk of upgrading and upstaging among 10 000 patients with Gleason 3 + 4 favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(1):69–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Barrett T, Haider MA. The emerging role of MRI in prostate cancer active surveillance and ongoing challenges. Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208(1):131–9. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ceci F, Castellucci P, Cerci JJ, Fanti S. New aspects of molecular imaging in prostate cancer. Methods. 2017;130:36–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Mueller-Mattheis V, Hautzel H, Boskovic J, Sawicki LM, Antoch G, Albers P. Limitations in using 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT for detection of recurrent disease following radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(15_suppl):e16110.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Bandini M, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Montorsi F, Briganti A. An explanatory case on the limitations of lymph node staging in recurrent prostate cancer. Urol Case Rep. 2017;12:34–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Silver DA, Pellicer I, Fair WR, Heston WD, Cordon-Cardo C. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Clin Cancer Res. 1997;3(1):81–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Rischpler C, Beck TI, Okamoto S, Schlitter AM, Knorr K, Schwaiger M, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC uptake in cervical, celiac, and sacral ganglia as an important pitfall in prostate cancer PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2018;59(9):1406–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Wieser G, Mansi R, Grosu AL, Schultze-Seemann W, Dumont-Walter RA, Meyer PT, et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging of prostate cancer with a gastrin releasing peptide receptor antagonist--from mice to men. Theranostics. 2014;4(4):412–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Roivainen A, Kähkönen E, Luoto P, Borkowski S, Hofmann B, Jambor I, et al. Plasma pharmacokinetics, whole-body distribution, metabolism, and radiation dosimetry of 68Ga bombesin antagonist BAY 86-7548 in healthy men. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(6):867–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Beer M, Montani M, Gerhardt J, Wild PJ, Hany TF, Hermanns T, et al. Profiling gastrin-releasing peptide receptor in prostate tissues: clinical implications and molecular correlates. Prostate. 2012;72(3):318–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.21434.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Nagasaki S, Nakamura Y, Maekawa T, Akahira J, Miki Y, Suzuki T, et al. Immunohistochemical analysis of gastrin-releasing peptide receptor (GRPR) and possible regulation by estrogen receptor βcx in human prostate carcinoma. Neoplasma. 2012;59(2):224–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Yan SS, Wu Z-Y, Zhang HP, Furtado G, Chen X, Yan SF, et al. Suppression of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis by selective blockade of encephalitogenic T-cell infiltration of the central nervous system. Nat Med. 2003;9(3):287–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Mitsuhashi T, Li YM, Fishbane S, Vlassara H. Depletion of reactive advanced glycation endproducts from diabetic uremic sera using a lysozyme-linked matrix. J Clin Invest. 1997;100(4):847–54 [cited 2016 Feb 27] Available from: http://www.jci.org/articles/view/119600.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Corman B, Duriez M, Poitevin P, Heudes D, Bruneval P, Tedgui A, et al. Aminoguanidine prevents age-related arterial stiffening and cardiac hypertrophy. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1998;95(3):1301–6 [cited 2016 Feb 27] Available from: http://www.pnas.org/content/95/3/1301.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Kuhla A, Norden J, Abshagen K, Menger MD, Vollmar B. RAGE blockade and hepatic microcirculation in experimental endotoxaemic liver failure. Br J Surg. 2013;100(9):1229–39.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Teng F-F, Meng X, Sun X-D, Yu J-M. New strategy for monitoring targeted therapy: molecular imaging. Int J Nanomedicine. 2013;8:3703–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Owen M, Howlett CR, Triffitt JT. Movement of 125I albumin and125I polyvinylpyrrolidone through bone tissue fluid. Calcif Tissue Res. 1977;23(1):103–12 [cited 2019 Apr 8] Available from: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FBF02012773.pdf.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhou Z, Xiong W-C. RAGE and its ligands in bone metabolism. Front Biosci (Schol Ed). 2011;3:768–76.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, Carroll PR. Contemporary trends in low-risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. 2009;27(5):417–28.

  69. Aerts HJWL, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RTH, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Carvalho S, et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nat Commun. 2014;5(1):4006.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was funded in part by the Cancer Center at Illinois (CCIL) pilot grant, Ministry of Science and Higher Education Poland ((DIR/WK/2017/01), and Foundation for Polish Science (TEAM/2011-7/5).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioengineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA

    Christian J. Konopka, Jamila Hedhli & Lawrence W. Dobrucki

  2. Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, Urbana, IL, USA

    Christian J. Konopka, Marcin Woźniak, Jamila Hedhli, Iwona T. Dobrucki & Lawrence W. Dobrucki

  3. Department of Medical Laboratory Diagnostics – Biobank, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

    Marcin Woźniak, Anna Siekierzycka, Jarosław Skokowski, Leszek Kalinowski & Lawrence W. Dobrucki

  4. Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure Poland (BBMRI.PL), Gdansk, Poland

    Jarosław Skokowski, Leszek Kalinowski & Lawrence W. Dobrucki

  5. Department of Surgical Oncology, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

    Jarosław Skokowski

  6. Department of Pathology, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

    Rafał Pęksa

  7. Department of Urology, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

    Marcin Matuszewski

  8. Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Illinois College of Medicine, Rockford, IL, USA

    Gnanasekar Munirathinam

  9. Department of Pathology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Andre Kajdacsy-Balla

  10. Cancer Center at Illinois, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA

    Lawrence W. Dobrucki

  11. Carle-Illinois College of Medicine, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 405 N Mathews Ave, MC-251, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA

    Lawrence W. Dobrucki

Authors
  1. Christian J. Konopka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marcin Woźniak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jamila Hedhli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anna Siekierzycka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jarosław Skokowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rafał Pęksa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Marcin Matuszewski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Gnanasekar Munirathinam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Andre Kajdacsy-Balla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Iwona T. Dobrucki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Leszek Kalinowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Lawrence W. Dobrucki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence W. Dobrucki.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. Samples from prostate cancer patients were obtained from the Medical University of Gdansk, Poland, and Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure in Poland following the approval by the local Ethics Review Committee of the Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland (no. NKBBN/217/2016).

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Preclinical Imaging

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Konopka, C.J., Woźniak, M., Hedhli, J. et al. Quantitative imaging of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 47, 2562–2576 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-04721-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-04721-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation