Literature DB >> 15869459

Comparison of different thyroid committed doses in radioiodine therapy for Graves' hyperthyroidism.

Mariano Grosso1, Antonio Traino, Giuseppe Boni, Elena Banti, Mauro Della Porta, Gianpiero Manca, Duccio Volterrani, Serena Chiacchio, Abedallatif AlSharif, Elisa Borsò, Rosanna Raschillà, Fabio Di Martino, Giuliano Mariani.   

Abstract

Despite vast worldwide experience in the use of 131I for treating Graves' disease (GD), no consensus of opinion exists concerning the optimal method of dose calculation. In one of the most popular equations, the administered (131)I dose is directly proportional to the estimated thyroid gland volume and inversely proportional to the measured 24-hour radioiodine uptake. In this study, we compared the efficiency of different tissue-absorbed doses to induce euthyroidism or hypothyroidism within 1 year after radioiodine therapy in GD patients. The study was carried out in 134 GD patients (age, 53 +/- 14 year; range, 16-82 year; thyroid volume, 28 +/- 18 mL; range, 6-95 mL; average 24-hour thyroid uptake, 72%) treated with (131)I therapy. The average radioiodine activity administered to patients was 518 +/- 226 MBq (range, 111-1110). The corresponding average thyroid absorbed dose, calculated by a modified Medical Internal Radiation Dose (MIRD) equation was 376 +/- 258 Gy (range, 99-1683). One year after treatment, 58 patients (43%) were hypothyroid, 57 patients (43%) were euthyroid, and 19 patients (14%) remained hyperthyroid. The patients were divided into 3 groups: 150 Gy (n = 32), 300 Gy (n = 58) and >300 Gy (n = 44). No significant difference in the rate of recurrent hyperthyroidism was found among the 3 groups (150 Gy: 15%; 300 Gy: 14%; and > or =300 Gy: 14%; chi-square test, p = 0.72). Whereas, the rate of hypothyroidism in the 3 groups was significantly correlated with the dose (150 Gy: 30%; 300 Gy: 46%; >300 Gy: 71%; chi-square test, p = 0.0003). The results obtained in this study show no correlation between dose and outcome of radioiodine therapy (in terms of persistent hyperthyroidism) for thyroid absorbed doses > or =150 Gy, while confirming the relation between the thyroid absorbed dose and the incidence of hypothyroidism in GD patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15869459     DOI: 10.1089/cbr.2005.20.218

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Biother Radiopharm        ISSN: 1084-9785            Impact factor:   3.099


  5 in total

1.  Serum thyroxine and age--rather than thyroid volume and serum TSH--are determinants of the thyroid radioiodine uptake in patients with nodular goiter.

Authors:  S J Bonnema; S Fast; V E Nielsen; H Boel-Jørgensen; P Grupe; P B Andersen; L Hegedüs
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 4.256

2.  Failure of radioactive iodine in the treatment of hyperthyroidism.

Authors:  David F Schneider; Philip E Sonderman; Michaela F Jones; Kristin A Ojomo; Herbert Chen; Juan C Jaume; Diane F Elson; Scott B Perlman; Rebecca S Sippel
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Investigation of post-therapeutic image-based thyroid dosimetry using quantitative SPECT/CT, iodine biokinetics, and the MIRD's voxel S values in Graves' disease.

Authors:  Naotoshi Fujita; Yumiko Koshiba; Shinji Abe; Katsuhiko Kato
Journal:  EJNMMI Phys       Date:  2020-01-28

4.  A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between the Radiation Absorbed Dose to the Thyroid and Response in Patients Treated with Radioiodine for Graves' Disease.

Authors:  Jan Taprogge; Paul M D Gape; Lily Carnegie-Peake; Iain Murray; Jonathan I Gear; Francesca Leek; Steve L Hyer; Glenn D Flux
Journal:  Thyroid       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 6.568

5.  Radioiodine treatment of hyperthyroidism: fixed or calculated doses; intelligent design or science?

Authors:  Johannes W van Isselt; John M H de Klerk; Cornelis J M Lips
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 9.236

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.