Correction: Optimisation of the Synthesis and Cell Labelling Conditions for [89Zr]Zr-oxine and [89Zr]Zr-DFO-NCS: a Direct In Vitro Comparison in Cell Types with Distinct Therapeutic Applications

Zirconium immune-complexes for PET molecular imaging: Current status and prospects

“…Very recently, Friberger et al optimized the synthesis of both 89 Zr-DFO-NCS and 89 Zr-oxine radiotracers and performed a direct comparison of the cell labeling efficiency, although the two complexes present different cell tagging mechanisms (Figure 13) [227]. 89 Zr-DFO-NCS binds to the protein lysine on the cell membrane surface and was not internalized by the cells in contrast, 89 Zr-oxine complex forms a hydrophobic sphere that can passively diffuse across the cell membrane, where the oxine molecules liberate 89 Zr, which Zr unspecific binding to the cytoplasmic components.…”

“…The authors found that optimization of radiotracer syntheses resulted in an increase cell labeling efficiency of 89 Zr-DFO-NCS and 89 Zr-oxine to 70% and 64% respectively, which confirmed that 89 Zr-labeling in both cases not significantly affected the cell viability or proliferation rate. They concluded that 89 Zr-oxine was a better agent for cell labeling due to its higher stability, greater cellular retention, and minimal variation between cell types [227]. Lechermann et al labeled T cells by incubation with different concentrations of 89 Zr-oxine to estimate the limit for PET imaging detection [228].…”