SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Comparative Study of Two Oxidizing Agents, Chloramine T and Iodo-Gen<sup>®</sup>, for the Radiolabeling of β-CIT with Iodine-131: Relevance for Parkinson's Disease.

Pharmaceuticals (Basel) · 2019-02-05

DOI: 10.3390/ph12010025PMID: 30764521

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by the loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta, leading to alteration of the integrity of dopaminergic transporters (DATs). In recent years, some radiopharmaceuticals have been used in the clinic to evaluate the integrity of DATs. These include tropane derivatives such as radiolabeled β-CIT and FP-CIT with iodine-123 (123I), and TRODAT-1 with metastable technetium-99 (99mTc). Radiolabeling of β-CIT with radioactive iodine is based on electrophilic radioiodination using oxidizing agents, such as Chloramine T or Iodo-Gen®. For the first time, the present work performed a comparative study of the radiolabeling of β-CIT with iodine-131 (131I), using either Chloramine T or Iodo-Gen® as oxidizing agents, in order to improve the radiolabeling process of β-CIT and to choose the most advantageous oxidizing agent to be used in nuclear medicine. Both radiolabeling methods were similar and resulted in high radiochemical yield (> 95%), with suitable 131I-β-CIT stability up to 72 h. Although Chloramine T is a strong oxidizing agent, it was as effective as Iodo-Gen® for β-CIT radiolabeling with 131I, with the advantage of briefer reaction time and solubility in aqueous medium.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.