Andreas Delker1, Wolfgang Peter Fendler1, Clemens Kratochwil2, Anika Brunegraf1, Astrid Gosewisch1, Franz Josef Gildehaus1, Stefan Tritschler3, Christian Georg Stief3, Klaus Kopka4, Uwe Haberkorn2, Peter Bartenstein1, Guido Böning5. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. 2. Department for Nuclear Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Department of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany. 4. Division of Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. Guido.Boening@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Dosimetry is critical to achieve the optimal therapeutic effect of radioligand therapy (RLT) with limited side effects. Our aim was to perform image-based absorbed dose calculation for the new PSMA ligand (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617 in support of its use for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. METHODS: Whole-body planar images and SPECT/CT images of the abdomen were acquired in five patients (mean age 68 years) for during two treatment cycles at approximately 1, 24, 48 and 72 h after administration of 3.6 GBq (range 3.4 to 3.9 GBq) (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617. Quantitative 3D SPECT OSEM reconstruction was performed with corrections for photon scatter, photon attenuation and detector blurring. A camera-specific calibration factor derived from phantom measurements was used for quantitation. Absorbed doses were calculated for various organs from the images using a combination of linear approximation, exponential fit, and target-specific S values, in accordance with the MIRD scheme. Absorbed doses to bone marrow were estimated from planar and SPECT images and with consideration of the blood sampling method according to the EANM guidelines. RESULTS: The average (± SD) absorbed doses per cycle were 2.2 ± 0.6 Gy for the kidneys (0.6 Gy/GBq), 5.1 ± 1.8 Gy for the salivary glands (1.4 Gy/GBq), 0.4 ± 0.2 Gy for the liver (0.1 Gy/GBq), 0.4 ± 0.1 Gy for the spleen (0.1 Gy/GBq), and 44 ± 19 mGy for the bone marrow (0.012 Gy/GBq). The organ absorbed doses did not differ significantly between cycles. The critical absorbed dose reported for the kidneys (23 Gy) was not reached in any patient. At 24 h there was increased uptake in the colon with 50 - 70 % overlap to the kidneys on planar images. Absorbed doses for tumour lesions ranged between 1.2 and 47.5 Gy (13.1 Gy/GBq) per cycle. CONCLUSION: The salivary glands and kidneys showed high, but not critical, absorbed doses after RLT with (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617. We suggest that (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617 is suitable for radiotherapy, offering tumour-to-kidney ratios comparable to those with RLT agents currently available for the treatment of neuroendocrine tumours. Our dosimetry results suggest that (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617 treatment with higher activities and more cycles is possible without the risk of damaging the kidneys.
PURPOSE: Dosimetry is critical to achieve the optimal therapeutic effect of radioligand therapy (RLT) with limited side effects. Our aim was to perform image-based absorbed dose calculation for the new PSMA ligand (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617 in support of its use for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. METHODS: Whole-body planar images and SPECT/CT images of the abdomen were acquired in five patients (mean age 68 years) for during two treatment cycles at approximately 1, 24, 48 and 72 h after administration of 3.6 GBq (range 3.4 to 3.9 GBq) (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617. Quantitative 3D SPECT OSEM reconstruction was performed with corrections for photon scatter, photon attenuation and detector blurring. A camera-specific calibration factor derived from phantom measurements was used for quantitation. Absorbed doses were calculated for various organs from the images using a combination of linear approximation, exponential fit, and target-specific S values, in accordance with the MIRD scheme. Absorbed doses to bone marrow were estimated from planar and SPECT images and with consideration of the blood sampling method according to the EANM guidelines. RESULTS: The average (± SD) absorbed doses per cycle were 2.2 ± 0.6 Gy for the kidneys (0.6 Gy/GBq), 5.1 ± 1.8 Gy for the salivary glands (1.4 Gy/GBq), 0.4 ± 0.2 Gy for the liver (0.1 Gy/GBq), 0.4 ± 0.1 Gy for the spleen (0.1 Gy/GBq), and 44 ± 19 mGy for the bone marrow (0.012 Gy/GBq). The organ absorbed doses did not differ significantly between cycles. The critical absorbed dose reported for the kidneys (23 Gy) was not reached in any patient. At 24 h there was increased uptake in the colon with 50 - 70 % overlap to the kidneys on planar images. Absorbed doses for tumour lesions ranged between 1.2 and 47.5 Gy (13.1 Gy/GBq) per cycle. CONCLUSION: The salivary glands and kidneys showed high, but not critical, absorbed doses after RLT with (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617. We suggest that (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617 is suitable for radiotherapy, offering tumour-to-kidney ratios comparable to those with RLT agents currently available for the treatment of neuroendocrine tumours. Our dosimetry results suggest that (177)Lu-DKFZ-PSMA-617 treatment with higher activities and more cycles is possible without the risk of damaging the kidneys.
Authors: Lawrence E Williams; An Liu; Dave M Yamauchi; George Lopatin; Andrew A Raubitschek; Jeffrey Y C Wong Journal: Cancer Date: 2002-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Neil H Bander; Matthew I Milowsky; David M Nanus; Lale Kostakoglu; Shankar Vallabhajosula; Stanley J Goldsmith Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-04-18 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Andreas Delker; Harun Ilhan; Christian Zach; Julia Brosch; Franz Josef Gildehaus; Sebastian Lehner; Peter Bartenstein; Guido Böning Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Martina Benešová; Martin Schäfer; Ulrike Bauder-Wüst; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Clemens Kratochwil; Walter Mier; Uwe Haberkorn; Klaus Kopka; Matthias Eder Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Matthew I Milowsky; David M Nanus; Lale Kostakoglu; Shankar Vallabhajosula; Stanley J Goldsmith; Neil H Bander Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-06-01 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: B L R Kam; J J M Teunissen; E P Krenning; W W de Herder; S Khan; E I van Vliet; D J Kwekkeboom Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Simona Malaspina; Ugo De Giorgi; Jukka Kemppainen; Angelo Del Sole; Giovanni Paganelli Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Sangeeta Ray Banerjee; Vivek Kumar; Ala Lisok; Donika Plyku; Zora Nováková; Mary Brummet; Bryan Wharram; Cyril Barinka; Robert Hobbs; Martin G Pomper Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-09-20 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Clemens Kratochwil; Wolfgang Peter Fendler; Matthias Eiber; Richard Baum; Murat Fani Bozkurt; Johannes Czernin; Roberto C Delgado Bolton; Samer Ezziddin; Flavio Forrer; Rodney J Hicks; Thomas A Hope; Levant Kabasakal; Mark Konijnenberg; Klaus Kopka; Michael Lassmann; Felix M Mottaghy; Wim Oyen; Kambiz Rahbar; Heiko Schöder; Irene Virgolini; Hans-Jürgen Wester; Lisa Bodei; Stefano Fanti; Uwe Haberkorn; Ken Herrmann Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 9.236