Radioactive antibody fragment may help scientists identify artery deposits

Creating a radioactive antibody fragment may allow scientists to identify fat and debris deposits in artery walls that are most likely to rupture and cause heart attacks, according to a new study in Circulation: Research, an American Heart Association journal.

Of the more than 17 million annual cardiovascular deaths worldwide, most result from ruptured plaque. "The detection of vulnerable coronary plaques is a major clinical challenge because it would allow preventive patient management prior to a heart attack," said Alexis Broisat, Ph.D., the study's lead author and a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Grenoble in France. "In clinical practice, there is currently no early, reliable and noninvasive tool allowing such detection."

The researchers created radioactive antibody fragments called nanobodies that attached to particles in artery plaque called vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM1).

"Nanobodies constitute a promising new class of radiotracers for ," Broisat said. Ongoing inflammation in a plaque deposit is a crucial sign that the plaque may rupture, and VCAM1 plays a major role in the inflammation process.

In laboratory tests, the radioactive nanobodies were attracted to VCAM-1.

In , researchers injected a solution containing the into the blood stream of mice with artery plaques. They then used a single-proton emission computed tomography (SPECT/CT) imaging scan to detect the radioactive particles.

The nanobodies attached to VCAM-1 expressing tissues. Following radiolabeling, some of the nanobodies remained stable in the laboratory and in mouse blood for six hours. This allowed imaging of the mice up to three hours after nanobody injection. These scans revealed plaques in the animals' aortic arches.

If approved for human use, physicians can inject nanobodies into patients to determine if they are at risk of .

"The early detection of trouble looming ahead could trigger steps for intervention, possibly involving the aggressive modulation of risk factors," according to an editorial accompanying the report by Matthias Nahrendorf, M.D., Ph.D., Jason R. McCarthy, Ph.D., and Peter Libby, M.D., of Harvard Medical School in Boston, Mass.

Before the imaging concept can be used regularly, researchers must conduct toxicology studies, produce clinical-quality material and determine whether the radiotracer technique is safe, beneficial and cost effective.

Broisat and his colleagues are planning clinical studies of the radiotracer technique to address these issues, including whether the anti-VCAM1 nanobodies can trigger adverse immune system reactions in people.

Related Stories

Inflammation worsens danger due to atherosclerosis

Jan 22, 2009

Current research suggests that inflammation increases the risk of plaque rupture in atherosclerosis. The related report by Ovchinnikova et al, "T cell activation leads to reduced collagen maturation in atherosclerotic plaques ...

Mount Sinai pioneers new cardiac imaging device

Aug 16, 2010

Researchers from Mount Sinai School of Medicine have for the first time developed a way to visualize coronary artery plaques vulnerable to rupture using multi-color computed tomography (CT), an innovation that will lead to ...

Recommended for you

Barriers preventing post-stroke care

Jul 24, 2014

For stroke victims, rehabilitation is crucial to their recovery. But a Flinders University study conducted in Singapore found that rehabilitation rates following discharge from hospital are poor because of gaps in the continuum ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

speakermagnet
not rated yet Mar 30, 2012
I wonder about the accumulation of these elements in areas that are likely already constricted. The antibodies are very small but not necessarily the radioactive substrate where they are attached. I'm not sure how long the antibody would stay affixed to VCAM-1 and hence potentially restrict flow.
cwurld
not rated yet Mar 31, 2012
I think its good people do research like this. However it will be a long time before anyone knows if the method is "beneficial". And once the drug companies get involved, "beneficial" may refer more to their bottom line, than to the patients well being (stents - for example).

The biggest problem will be how often the method identifies areas that never would harm the patient. When that happens, it will probably lead to a risky, highly invasive procedure, that the patient would not have otherwise.