UNLABELLED: (18)F-Labeled substance P antagonist-receptor quantifier ([(18)F]SPA-RQ) [2-fluoromethoxy-5-(5-trifluoromethyl-tetrazol-1-yl)-benzyl]-[(2S,3S)-2-phenyl-piperidin-3-yl)amine] is a selective radioligand for in vivo quantification of tachykinin NK(1) receptors with PET. The aims of this study were to estimate the radiation safety profile and relative risks of [(18)F]SPA-RQ with 3 different methods of image analysis. METHODS: Whole-body PET images were acquired in 7 healthy subjects after injection of 192 +/- 7 MBq (5.2 +/- 0.2 mCi) [(18)F]SPA-RQ. Emission images were serially acquired at multiple time-points from 0 to 120 min and approximately 180-240 min after injection. Urine samples were collected after each imaging session and for 24 h after the last scan to measure excreted radioactivity. Horizontal tomographic images were compressed to varying degrees in the anteroposterior direction to create 3 datasets: thin-slice, bisected, and 2-dimensional (2D) planar images. Regions of interest were drawn around visually identifiable source organs to generate time-activity curves for each dataset. Residence times were determined from these curves, and doses to individual organs and the body as a whole were calculated using OLINDA/EXM 1.0. RESULTS: The lungs, upper large intestine wall, small intestine, urinary bladder wall, kidneys, and thyroid had the highest radiation-absorbed doses. Biexponential fitting of mean bladder and urine activity showed that about 41% of injected activity was excreted via urine. Assuming a 2.4-h urine voiding interval, the calculated effective doses from thin-slice, bisected, and 2D planar images were 29.5, 29.3, and 32.3 microSv/MBq (109, 108, and 120 mrem/mCi), respectively. CONCLUSION: Insofar as effective dose is an accurate measure of radiation risk, all 3 methods of analysis provided quite similar estimates of risk to human subjects. The radiation dose was moderate and would potentially allow subjects to receive multiple PET scans in a single year. Individual organ exposures varied among the 3 methods, especially for structures asymmetrically located in an anterior or posterior position. Bisected and 2D planar images almost always provided higher organ dose estimates than thin-slice images. Thus, either the bisected or 2D planar method of analysis appears acceptable for quantifying human radiation burden, at least for radioligands with a relatively broad distribution in the body and not concentrated in a small number of radiation sensitive organs.
UNLABELLED: (18)F-Labeled substance P antagonist-receptor quantifier ([(18)F]SPA-RQ) [2-fluoromethoxy-5-(5-trifluoromethyl-tetrazol-1-yl)-benzyl]-[(2S,3S)-2-phenyl-piperidin-3-yl)amine] is a selective radioligand for in vivo quantification of tachykinin NK(1) receptors with PET. The aims of this study were to estimate the radiation safety profile and relative risks of [(18)F]SPA-RQ with 3 different methods of image analysis. METHODS: Whole-body PET images were acquired in 7 healthy subjects after injection of 192 +/- 7 MBq (5.2 +/- 0.2 mCi) [(18)F]SPA-RQ. Emission images were serially acquired at multiple time-points from 0 to 120 min and approximately 180-240 min after injection. Urine samples were collected after each imaging session and for 24 h after the last scan to measure excreted radioactivity. Horizontal tomographic images were compressed to varying degrees in the anteroposterior direction to create 3 datasets: thin-slice, bisected, and 2-dimensional (2D) planar images. Regions of interest were drawn around visually identifiable source organs to generate time-activity curves for each dataset. Residence times were determined from these curves, and doses to individual organs and the body as a whole were calculated using OLINDA/EXM 1.0. RESULTS: The lungs, upper large intestine wall, small intestine, urinary bladder wall, kidneys, and thyroid had the highest radiation-absorbed doses. Biexponential fitting of mean bladder and urine activity showed that about 41% of injected activity was excreted via urine. Assuming a 2.4-h urine voiding interval, the calculated effective doses from thin-slice, bisected, and 2D planar images were 29.5, 29.3, and 32.3 microSv/MBq (109, 108, and 120 mrem/mCi), respectively. CONCLUSION: Insofar as effective dose is an accurate measure of radiation risk, all 3 methods of analysis provided quite similar estimates of risk to human subjects. The radiation dose was moderate and would potentially allow subjects to receive multiple PET scans in a single year. Individual organ exposures varied among the 3 methods, especially for structures asymmetrically located in an anterior or posterior position. Bisected and 2D planar images almost always provided higher organ dose estimates than thin-slice images. Thus, either the bisected or 2D planar method of analysis appears acceptable for quantifying human radiation burden, at least for radioligands with a relatively broad distribution in the body and not concentrated in a small number of radiation sensitive organs.
Authors: Olof Solin; Olli Eskola; Terence G Hamill; Jörgen Bergman; Pertti Lehikoinen; Tove Grönroos; Sarita Forsback; Merja Haaparanta; Tapio Viljanen; Christine Ryan; Raymond Gibson; Gerard Kieczykowski; Jarmo Hietala; Richard Hargreaves; H Donald Burns Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2004 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Nicholas Seneca; Bengt Andree; Nils Sjoholm; Magnus Schou; Stefan Pauli; P David Mozley; James B Stubbs; Jeih-San Liow; Judit Sovago; Balazs Gulyás; Robert Innis; Christer Halldin Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: Kelly Pendergrass; Richard Hargreaves; Kevin J Petty; Alexandra D Carides; Judith K Evans; Kevin J Horgan Journal: Drugs Today (Barc) Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 2.245
Authors: Craig A Stockmeier; Xiaochun Shi; Lisa Konick; James C Overholser; George Jurjus; Herbert Y Meltzer; Lee Friedman; Pierre Blier; Grazyna Rajkowska Journal: Neuroreport Date: 2002-07-02 Impact factor: 1.837
Authors: Garth E Terry; Jussi Hirvonen; Jeih-San Liow; Nicholas Seneca; Johannes T Tauscher; John M Schaus; Lee Phebus; Christian C Felder; Cheryl L Morse; Victor W Pike; Christer Halldin; Robert B Innis Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-03-24 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Yasuyuki Kimura; Fabrice G Siméon; Jun Hatazawa; P David Mozley; Victor W Pike; Robert B Innis; Masahiro Fujita Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Johanna M Jarcho; Natasha A Feier; Alberto Bert; Jennifer A Labus; Maunoo Lee; Jean Stains; Bahar Ebrat; Stephanie M Groman; Kirsten Tillisch; Arthur L Brody; Edythe D London; Mark A Mandelkern; Emeran A Mayer Journal: Pain Date: 2013-03-05 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Nicholas Seneca; Mette Skinbjerg; Sami S Zoghbi; Jeih-San Liow; Robert L Gladding; Jinsoo Hong; Pavitra Kannan; Edward Tuan; David R Sibley; Christer Halldin; Victor W Pike; Robert B Innis Journal: Synapse Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 2.562
Authors: Jussi Hirvonen; Anne Roivainen; Jere Virta; Semi Helin; Kjell Någren; Juha O Rinne Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2009-10-28 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Nicholas Seneca; Sami S Zoghbi; Jeih-San Liow; William Kreisl; Peter Herscovitch; Kimberly Jenko; Robert L Gladding; Andrew Taku; Victor W Pike; Robert B Innis Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-04-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: David R Sprague; Masahiro Fujita; Yong Hoon Ryu; Jeih-San Liow; Victor W Pike; Robert B Innis Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.408