Conclusions
Gemcitabine and 5-FU target the same regions of the tumor, leaving hypoxic cells untreated. Capecitabine metabolites penetrate further into the tumor but it is yet to be determined whether these metabolites are the active form of the drug.
Purpose
To develop a technique to compare the intra-tumoral distribution of the drug gemcitabine, its surrogate [18F]-fluoroarabinocytosine ([18F]-FAC) and related chemotherapeutics 5-FU and capecitabine in a pre-clinical model of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Experimental design: Using a KPC-organoid derived model of PDAC, we obtained autoradiographic images of the tumor distribution of, [14C]-gemcitabine, [14C]-5-FU, [3H]-capecitabine. These were compared indirectly by co-administering [18F]-FAC, a close analog of gemcitabine with a proven equivalent intra-tumor distribution. The short half-life of 18F allows for clean separation of 3H/14C labeled drugs in specimens by dual isotope digital autoradiography. Autoradiographic images of [14C]-gemcitabine, [3H]-capecitabine and [14C]-5-FU were each correlated to [18F]-FAC on a pixel-by-pixel basis. The tumor drug penetration was compared using cumulative histograms.
Results
Gemcitabine distribution correlated strongly with FAC as expected. 5-FU also gave a similar microdistribution to that of FAC, whereas no correlation was found between capecitabine or its metabolic products and FAC distribution. Accumulation of Gemcitabine and 5-FU was lower in hypoxic regions of the tumor, whereas no such correlation was observed for capecitabine and its metabolites. Conclusions: Gemcitabine and 5-FU target the same regions of the tumor, leaving hypoxic cells untreated. Capecitabine metabolites penetrate further into the tumor but it is yet to be determined whether these metabolites are the active form of the drug.