UNLABELLED: This study is a retrospective analysis of 124 differentiated thyroid cancer patients who underwent dosimetric evaluation using MIRD methodology over a period of 15 y. The objectives of the study were to demonstrate the clinical use of dosimetry-guided radioactive iodine ([RAI] (131)I) treatment and the safe and effective application of a 3-Gy bone marrow (BM) dose in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer. METHODS: Tumor and BM dose estimates were obtained. The administered activity that would deliver a maximum safe dose to the organ at risk (red BM or lungs) was determined as well as the resulting doses to the metastases. The clinical benefit of an individual RAI treatment was predicted on the basis of the dose estimates and the expected therapeutic response. Each patient's response to treatment was assessed clinically and by monitoring the hematologic profile. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four patients underwent 187 dosimetric evaluations. One hundred four RAI treatments were performed. A complete response at metastatic deposits was attained with absorbed doses of >100 Gy. No permanent BM suppression was observed in patients who received absorbed doses of <3 Gy to BM. The maximum administered dose was 38.5 GBq (1,040 mCi) with the BM dose limitation. CONCLUSION: Dosimetry-guided RAI treatment allows administration of the maximum possible RAI dose to achieve the maximum therapeutic benefit. Estimation of tumor dose rates helps to determine the curative versus the palliative intent of the therapy.
UNLABELLED: This study is a retrospective analysis of 124 differentiated thyroid cancerpatients who underwent dosimetric evaluation using MIRD methodology over a period of 15 y. The objectives of the study were to demonstrate the clinical use of dosimetry-guided radioactive iodine ([RAI] (131)I) treatment and the safe and effective application of a 3-Gy bone marrow (BM) dose in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer. METHODS:Tumor and BM dose estimates were obtained. The administered activity that would deliver a maximum safe dose to the organ at risk (red BM or lungs) was determined as well as the resulting doses to the metastases. The clinical benefit of an individual RAI treatment was predicted on the basis of the dose estimates and the expected therapeutic response. Each patient's response to treatment was assessed clinically and by monitoring the hematologic profile. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four patients underwent 187 dosimetric evaluations. One hundred four RAI treatments were performed. A complete response at metastatic deposits was attained with absorbed doses of >100 Gy. No permanent BM suppression was observed in patients who received absorbed doses of <3 Gy to BM. The maximum administered dose was 38.5 GBq (1,040 mCi) with the BM dose limitation. CONCLUSION: Dosimetry-guided RAI treatment allows administration of the maximum possible RAI dose to achieve the maximum therapeutic benefit. Estimation of tumor dose rates helps to determine the curative versus the palliative intent of the therapy.
Authors: Christopher Manganaris; Steven Wittlin; Haodong Xu; Michael Gurell; Patricia Sime; Robert Matthew Kottmann Journal: Chest Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Athanasios Bikas; Mark Schneider; Sameer Desale; Frank Atkins; Mihriye Mete; Kenneth D Burman; Leonard Wartofsky; Douglas Van Nostrand Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Lutz S Freudenberg; Walter Jentzen; Alexander Stahl; Andreas Bockisch; Sandra J Rosenbaum-Krumme Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-04-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: C Chiesa; K Sjogreen Gleisner; G Flux; J Gear; S Walrand; K Bacher; U Eberlein; E P Visser; N Chouin; M Ljungberg; M Bardiès; M Lassmann; L Strigari; M W Konijnenberg Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-05-24 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Bryan R Haugen; Erik K Alexander; Keith C Bible; Gerard M Doherty; Susan J Mandel; Yuri E Nikiforov; Furio Pacini; Gregory W Randolph; Anna M Sawka; Martin Schlumberger; Kathryn G Schuff; Steven I Sherman; Julie Ann Sosa; David L Steward; R Michael Tuttle; Leonard Wartofsky Journal: Thyroid Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Christoph Reiners; Heribert Hänscheid; Markus Luster; Michael Lassmann; Frederik A Verburg Journal: Nat Rev Endocrinol Date: 2011-08-09 Impact factor: 43.330
Authors: Glenn D Flux; Masud Haq; Sarah J Chittenden; Susan Buckley; Cecilia Hindorf; Kate Newbold; Clive L Harmer Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2009-09-04 Impact factor: 9.236