PURPOSE: To investigate whether the tumour uptake of radionuclide in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) of meningioma can be predicted by a PET scan with (68)Ga-labelled somatostatin analogue. METHODS: In this pilot trial, 11 meningioma patients with a PET scan indicating somatostatin receptor expression received PRRT with 7.4 GBq (177)Lu-DOTATOC or (177)Lu-DOTATATE, followed by external beam radiotherapy. A second PET scan was scheduled for 3 months after therapy. During PRRT, multiple whole-body scans and a SPECT/CT scan of the head and neck region were acquired and used to determine the kinetics and dose in the voxel with the highest radionuclide uptake within the tumour. Maximum voxel dose and retention of activity 1 h after administration in PRRT were compared to the maximum standardized uptake values (SUV(max)) in the meningiomas from the PET scans before and after therapy. RESULTS: The median SUV(max) in the meningiomas was 13.7 (range 4.3 to 68.7), and the maximum fractional radionuclide uptake in voxels of size 0.11 cm³ was a median of 23.4 × 10(-6) (range 0.4 × 10(-6) to 68.3 × 10(-6)). A strong correlation was observed between SUV(max) and the PRRT radionuclide tumour retention in the voxels with the highest uptake (Spearman's rank test, P < 0.01). Excluding one patient who showed large differences in biokinetics between PET and PRRT and another patient with incomplete data, linear regression analysis indicated significant correlations between SUV(max) and the therapeutic uptake (r = 0.95) and between SUV(max) and the maximum voxel dose from PRRT (r = 0.76). Observed absolute deviations from the values expected from regression were a median of 5.6 × 10(-6) (maximum 9.3 × 10(-6)) for the voxel fractional radionuclide uptake and 0.40 Gy per GBq (maximum 0.85 Gy per GBq) (177)Lu for the voxel dose from PRRT. CONCLUSION: PET with (68)Ga-labelled somatostatin analogues allows the pretherapeutic assessment of tumour radionuclide uptake in PRRT of meningioma and an estimate of the achievable dose.
PURPOSE: To investigate whether the tumour uptake of radionuclide in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) of meningioma can be predicted by a PET scan with (68)Ga-labelled somatostatin analogue. METHODS: In this pilot trial, 11 meningiomapatients with a PET scan indicating somatostatin receptor expression received PRRT with 7.4 GBq (177)Lu-DOTATOC or (177)Lu-DOTATATE, followed by external beam radiotherapy. A second PET scan was scheduled for 3 months after therapy. During PRRT, multiple whole-body scans and a SPECT/CT scan of the head and neck region were acquired and used to determine the kinetics and dose in the voxel with the highest radionuclide uptake within the tumour. Maximum voxel dose and retention of activity 1 h after administration in PRRT were compared to the maximum standardized uptake values (SUV(max)) in the meningiomas from the PET scans before and after therapy. RESULTS: The median SUV(max) in the meningiomas was 13.7 (range 4.3 to 68.7), and the maximum fractional radionuclide uptake in voxels of size 0.11 cm³ was a median of 23.4 × 10(-6) (range 0.4 × 10(-6) to 68.3 × 10(-6)). A strong correlation was observed between SUV(max) and the PRRT radionuclidetumour retention in the voxels with the highest uptake (Spearman's rank test, P < 0.01). Excluding one patient who showed large differences in biokinetics between PET and PRRT and another patient with incomplete data, linear regression analysis indicated significant correlations between SUV(max) and the therapeutic uptake (r = 0.95) and between SUV(max) and the maximum voxel dose from PRRT (r = 0.76). Observed absolute deviations from the values expected from regression were a median of 5.6 × 10(-6) (maximum 9.3 × 10(-6)) for the voxel fractional radionuclide uptake and 0.40 Gy per GBq (maximum 0.85 Gy per GBq) (177)Lu for the voxel dose from PRRT. CONCLUSION: PET with (68)Ga-labelled somatostatin analogues allows the pretherapeutic assessment of tumourradionuclide uptake in PRRT of meningioma and an estimate of the achievable dose.
Authors: Thorsten D Poeppel; Ina Binse; Stephan Petersenn; Harald Lahner; Matthias Schott; Gerald Antoch; Wolfgang Brandau; Andreas Bockisch; Christian Boy Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: M Henze; J Schuhmacher; P Hipp; J Kowalski; D W Becker; J Doll; H R Mäcke; M Hofmann; J Debus; U Haberkorn Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: J P Esser; E P Krenning; J J M Teunissen; P P M Kooij; A L H van Gameren; W H Bakker; D J Kwekkeboom Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-07-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: F Forrer; H Uusijärvi; C Waldherr; M Cremonesi; P Bernhardt; J Mueller-Brand; H R Maecke Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2004-06-10 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Andreas Helisch; Gregor J Förster; Helmut Reber; Hans-Georg Buchholz; Rudolf Arnold; Burkhard Göke; Matthias M Weber; Bertram Wiedenmann; Stanislas Pauwels; Ulrike Haus; Hakim Bouterfa; Peter Bartenstein Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2004-06-03 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Dik J Kwekkeboom; Wouter W de Herder; Boen L Kam; Casper H van Eijck; Martijn van Essen; Peter P Kooij; Richard A Feelders; Maarten O van Aken; Eric P Krenning Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Flavio Forrer; Eric P Krenning; Peter P Kooij; Bert F Bernard; Mark Konijnenberg; Willem H Bakker; Jaap J M Teunissen; Marion de Jong; Kirsten van Lom; Wouter W de Herder; Dik J Kwekkeboom Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2009-02-27 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Frederik A Verburg; Alexander Heinzel; Heribert Hänscheid; Felix M Mottaghy; Markus Luster; Luca Giovanella Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Michael Sommerauer; Jan-Karl Burkhardt; Karl Frontzek; Elisabeth Rushing; Alfred Buck; Niklaus Krayenbuehl; Michael Weller; Niklaus Schaefer; Felix P Kuhn Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2016-02-09 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Norbert Galldiks; Karl-Josef Langen; Nathalie L Albert; Marc Chamberlain; Riccardo Soffietti; Michelle M Kim; Ian Law; Emilie Le Rhun; Susan Chang; Julian Schwarting; Stephanie E Combs; Matthias Preusser; Peter Forsyth; Whitney Pope; Michael Weller; Jörg C Tonn Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Raymond Y Huang; Wenya Linda Bi; Brent Griffith; Timothy J Kaufmann; Christian la Fougère; Nils Ole Schmidt; Jöerg C Tonn; Michael A Vogelbaum; Patrick Y Wen; Kenneth Aldape; Farshad Nassiri; Gelareh Zadeh; Ian F Dunn Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-01-14 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Priscilla K Brastianos; Evanthia Galanis; Nicholas Butowski; Jason W Chan; Ian F Dunn; Roland Goldbrunner; Christel Herold-Mende; Franziska M Ippen; Christian Mawrin; Michael W McDermott; Andrew Sloan; James Snyder; Ghazaleh Tabatabai; Marcos Tatagiba; Joerg C Tonn; Patrick Y Wen; Kenneth Aldape; Farshad Nassiri; Gelareh Zadeh; Michael D Jenkinson; David R Raleigh Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-01-14 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Deni Hardiansyah; Christian Maass; Ali Asgar Attarwala; Berthold Müller; Peter Kletting; Felix M Mottaghy; Gerhard Glatting Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Asma Bashir; Mark Bitsch Vestergaard; Tina Binderup; Helle Broholm; Lisbeth Marner; Morten Ziebell; Kåre Fugleholm; Tiit Mathiesen; Andreas Kjær; Ian Law Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-03-13 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Ronald C Walker; Gary T Smith; Eric Liu; Brandon Moore; Jeff Clanton; Michael Stabin Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-03-20 Impact factor: 10.057