PURPOSE: To compare the prediction of therapeutic hepatic radiation-absorbed dose rates from tracer imaging plus a linearity assumption to estimation based on intra-therapy imaging in (131)I metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) therapy of refractory neuroblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Conjugate-view images of the liver were obtained before therapy for seven patients at seven times after a tracer infusion of (131)I MIBG and at three times after the therapy infusion. Measured liver activities were converted to dose-rate estimates. Three statistical models of the rates assuming double exponential dependences on time were examined. One of the three models allowed for a multiplicative correction to the therapeutic late-phase dose-rate amplitude. Results from that model: (1) the tracer prediction of the late-phase absorbed-dose-rate amplitude was a factor of 1.75 times the intra-therapy-estimated value, and (2) the difference between tracer prediction of the radiation-absorbed dose and intra-therapy estimation of it was statistically significant, and (3) the liver radiation-absorbed dose did not reach 30 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: A statistical modeling analysis finds that the radiation-absorbed dose after therapy appears to be lower than that which is predicted from the linear scaling with administered activity of the tracer radiation-absorbed dose. Hepatocyte toxicity is the most likely reason but it is not high enough to produce clinically observable results.
PURPOSE: To compare the prediction of therapeutic hepatic radiation-absorbed dose rates from tracer imaging plus a linearity assumption to estimation based on intra-therapy imaging in (131)I metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) therapy of refractory neuroblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Conjugate-view images of the liver were obtained before therapy for seven patients at seven times after a tracer infusion of (131)I MIBG and at three times after the therapy infusion. Measured liver activities were converted to dose-rate estimates. Three statistical models of the rates assuming double exponential dependences on time were examined. One of the three models allowed for a multiplicative correction to the therapeutic late-phase dose-rate amplitude. Results from that model: (1) the tracer prediction of the late-phase absorbed-dose-rate amplitude was a factor of 1.75 times the intra-therapy-estimated value, and (2) the difference between tracer prediction of the radiation-absorbed dose and intra-therapy estimation of it was statistically significant, and (3) the liver radiation-absorbed dose did not reach 30 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: A statistical modeling analysis finds that the radiation-absorbed dose after therapy appears to be lower than that which is predicted from the linear scaling with administered activity of the tracer radiation-absorbed dose. Hepatocyte toxicity is the most likely reason but it is not high enough to produce clinically observable results.
Authors: K F Koral; J Li; Y Dewaraja; C L Barrett; D D Regan; K R Zasadny; S G Rommelfanger; I R Francis; M S Kaminski; R L Wahl Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Kenneth F Koral; Yuni Dewaraja; Jia Li; Qiang Lin; Denise D Regan; Kenneth R Zasadny; Stephen G Rommelfanger; Issac R Francis; Mark S Kaminski; Richard L Wahl Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: K K Matthay; C Panina; J Huberty; D Price; D V Glidden; H R Tang; R A Hawkins; J Veatch; B Hasegawa Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Katherine K Matthay; Jessica C Tan; Judith G Villablanca; Gregory A Yanik; Janet Veatch; Benjamin Franc; Eilish Twomey; Biljana Horn; C Patrick Reynolds; Susan Groshen; Robert C Seeger; John M Maris Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-01-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Gregory A Yanik; John E Levine; Katherine K Matthay; James C Sisson; Barry L Shulkin; Brahm Shapiro; David Hubers; Susan Spalding; Tom Braun; James L M Ferrara; Raymond J Hutchinson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-04-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: R Ladenstein; T Philip; C Lasset; O Hartmann; A Garaventa; R Pinkerton; J Michon; J Pritchard; T Klingebiel; B Kremens; A Pearson; C Coze; P Paolucci; D Frappaz; H Gadner; F Chauvin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alekist Quach; Lingyun Ji; Vikash Mishra; Aimee Sznewajs; Janet Veatch; John Huberty; Benjamin Franc; Richard Sposto; Susan Groshen; Denice Wei; Paul Fitzgerald; John M Maris; Gregory Yanik; Randall A Hawkins; Judith G Villablanca; Katherine K Matthay Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2010-09-09 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: David A Edmondson; Erin E Karski; Ayano Kohlgruber; Harsha Koneru; Katherine K Matthay; Shelly Allen; Christine L Hartmann; Leif E Peterson; Steven G DuBois; Matthew A Coleman Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 2.841