Abstract

BackgroundThe radiofluorinated levodopa analogue 6-[18F]F-l-DOPA (3,4-dihydroxy-6-18F-l-phenylalanine) is a commonly employed radiotracer for PET/CT imaging of multiple oncological and neurological indications. An unusually large number of different radiosyntheses have been published to the point where two different Ph. Eur. monographs exist depending on whether the chemistry relies on electrophilic or nucleophilic radiosubstitution of appropriate chemical precursors. For new PET imaging sites wishing to adopt [18F]FDOPA into clinical practice, selecting the appropriate production process may be difficult and dependent on the clinical needs of the site.MethodsData from four years of [18F]FDOPA production at three different clinical sites are collected and compared. These three sites, Aarhus University Hospital (AUH), Odense University Hospital (OUH), and Herlev University Hospital (HUH), produce the radiotracer by different radiosynthetic routes with AUH adopting an electrophilic strategy, while OUH and HUH employ two different nucleophilic approaches. Production failure rates, radiochemical yields, and molar activities are compared across sites and time. Additionally, the clinical use of the radiotracer over the time period considered at the different sites are presented and discussed.ResultsThe electrophilic substitution route suffers from being demanding in terms of cyclotron operation and maintenance. This challenge, however, was found to be compensated by a production failure rate significantly below that of both nucleophilic approaches; a result of simpler chemistry. The five-step nucleophilic approach employed at HUH produces superior radiochemical yields compared to the three-step approach adopted at OUH but suffers from the need for more comprehensive synthesis equipment given the multi-step nature of the procedure, including HPLC purification. While the procedure at OUH furnishes the lowest radiochemical yield of the synthetic routes considered, it produces the highest molar activity. This is of importance across the clinical applications of the tracer discussed here, including dopamine synthesis in striatum of subjects with schizophrenia and congenital hyperinsulinism in infants.ConclusionFor most sites either of the two nucleophilic substitution strategies should be favored. However, which of the two will depend on whether a given site wishes to optimize the radiochemical yield or the ease of the use.

Highlights

  • The fluoro-substituted levodopa analogue 6-fluoro-L-dopa (3,4-dihydroxy-6-fluoro-Lphenylalanine) is a substrate for L-amino acid decarboxylase (Firnau et al 1980)

  • [18F]1 has been hailed for its usefulness as a multi-target molecule in positron emission tomography (PET)/ computed tomography (CT)-studies (Minn et al 2009), but the clinical use has to some extent been hampered by cumbersome and/or complicated radiosynthetic procedures (Pretze et al 2014)

  • (Radeberg, Germany), standard reagents are obtained from Sigma-Aldrich, sterile solutions from the Aarhus University Hospital Pharmacy (Aarhus, Denmark), SPE cartridges and sterile filters from Waters, and the high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) column is obtained from Phenomenex

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The fluoro-substituted levodopa analogue 6-fluoro-L-dopa (3,4-dihydroxy-6-fluoro-Lphenylalanine) is a substrate for L-amino acid decarboxylase (Firnau et al 1980). A radiochemical yield (RCY) of less than 1% prompted the same group to suggest an alternate method employing direct electrophilic fluorination of L-DOPA using [18F]F2 (Firnau et al 1984). Of the published electrophilic procedures, the fluorination of the commercially available enantiopure trimethylstannyl-precursor 2 (Scheme 1) with carrier-added [18F]F2 (Dolle et al 1998) remains the most commonly employed, and it is this method that is used for routine clinical production of [18F]1 at Aarhus University Hospital (AUH). Methods: Data from four years of [18F]FDOPA production at three different clinical sites are collected and compared These three sites, Aarhus University Hospital (AUH), Odense University Hospital (OUH), and Herlev University Hospital (HUH), produce the radiotracer by different radiosynthetic routes with AUH adopting an electrophilic strategy, while OUH and HUH employ two different nucleophilic approaches. The clinical use of the radiotracer over the time period considered at the different sites are presented and discussed

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call