| Literature DB >> 29158844 |
Tiantian Li1, Edwin C I Ao1, Bieke Lambert2,3, Boudewijn Brans4, Stefaan Vandenberghe5, Greta S P Mok1,6.
Abstract
Targeted radionuclide therapy (TRT) is a promising technique for cancer therapy. However, in order to deliver the required dose to the tumor, minimize potential toxicity in normal organs, as well as monitor therapeutic effects, it is important to assess the individualized internal dosimetry based on patient-specific data. Advanced imaging techniques, especially radionuclide imaging, can be used to determine the spatial distribution of administered tracers for calculating the organ-absorbed dose. While planar scintigraphy is still the mainstream imaging method, SPECT, PET and bremsstrahlung imaging have promising properties to improve accuracy in quantification. This article reviews the basic principles of TRT and discusses the latest development in radionuclide imaging techniques for different theranostic agents, with emphasis on their potential to improve personalized TRT dosimetry.Entities:
Keywords: Nuclear medicine imaging; internal dosimetry; targeted radionuclide therapy; theranostic agents.
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29158844 PMCID: PMC5695148 DOI: 10.7150/thno.19782
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1Flowchart and the potential error sources for imaging-based TRT dosimetry.
Figure 2The concept of direct and indirect imaging methods for TRT agents.
Absorbed doses to critical organs and tumors for various TRT agents.
| Therapeutic radionuclide | Probe | Ref | Radionuclide for Dosimetry | Mean Absorbed Dose for Critical Organs / Tumors | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I-131 | Iodine | I-124 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| rhTSH | 0.07-0.33 | 0.11-0.4 | 0.11-0.44 | 0.11-0.46 | 0.1-0.44 | 0.05-21 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| THW | 0.08-0.22 | 0.19-0.24 | 0.17-0.32 | 0.1-0.33 | 0.11-0.66 | 0.12-82 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tositumomab | I-131 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Imaging | 0.57-1.44 Gy | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Blood sampling | 0.40-1.55 Gy | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| MIBG | I-131 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 0.17 | 0.49 | 0.23 | 0.59 | 0.072 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 0.12 | 0.83 | 0.19 | 0.10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Y-90 | Microspheres | Y-90 | 18.3±10.3 | 148.1±92.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Zevalin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Zr-89 | N/A | 3.2 ± 1.8 | 2.9 ± 0.7 | N/A | 0.52 ± 0.04 | 8.6-28.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In-111 | 0.01-0.65 | 2.2-11.0 | 3.50-26.0 | 1.30-4.30 | 0.26-1.10 | N/A | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Y-90 | 0.0-0.3 | 2.9-8.1 | 1.8-20.0 | 1.2-3.4 | 0.6-1.8 | N/A | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| DOTA octreotide | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Y-86 | 2.73 ± 1.41 | 0.66 ± 1.5 | 2.32 ± 1.97 | 0.49 ± 0.002 | 32.1-195.8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Y-86 | 1.71 ± 0.89 | 0.72 ± 0.40 | 2.19 ± 1.11 | 0.06 ± 0.02 | 2.1-29.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In-111 | 3.9 ± 1.9 | 0.72 ± 0.57 | 7.62 ± 6.30 | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 1.4-31 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In-111 | 2.84 ±0 .64 | 0.92 ± 0.35 | 6.57 ± 5.25 | 0.17 ± 0.02 | 2.4-41.7 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In-111 | DPTA octreotide | In-111 | 0.52 ± 0.24 | 0.065 ± 0.01 | 0.34 ± 0.16 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.72-6.8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Lu-177 | DOTA octreotide | Lu-177 | 1.65 ± 0.47 | 0.21 ± 0.07 | 2.15 ± 0.39 | 0.07 ± 0.004 | 3.9-37.9 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PSMA | Lu-177 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1.3±2.3 | 0.8±0.4 | 0.07 ± 0.004 | 3.3±14 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 4.0±20 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Ho-166 | DOTMP | Ho-166 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 0.045±0.005 | 0.52 ± 0.22 | 0.78±0.30 | 0.84 ±0.17 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Microspheres | Ho-166 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SPECT | 7.7-54.3 Gy | 9.1-68.2 Gy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| MR | 13.2-64.9 Gy | 14.8-75.4 Gy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sm-153 | EDTMP | Sm-153 | 0.3-2.1 | 2.3-14.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sr-89 | Chloride | Sr-85 | 215±65.19 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Re-188 | HEDP | Re-188 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3.83±2.01 | 0.61±0.21 | 0.71±0.22 | 0.99±0.18 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
* Patients with metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer were injected with THW or rhTSH prior to I-131 administration. THW = thyroid stimulating hormone withdrawal; rhTSH = recombinant human thyroid-stimulating hormone.
MIBG=Metaiodobenzylguanidine; PSMA=Prostate-specific membrane antigen; HEDP=Hydroxyethyledine diphosphonate; EDTMP=Ethylenediamine tetramethylene phosphonate; DOTMP = 1, 4, 7, 10 tetraazacyclododecane-1, 4, 7, 10-tetramethylene-phosphonate
Figure 3The process for Y-90 radionuclide therapy and bremsstrahlung imaging for Y-90 dosimetry with a conventional gamma camera.
Overview of radionuclide imaging-based dosimetry for targeted radionuclide therapy.
| Imaging technique | Isotope | Energy window | Ref | Data source | Target region | Compensation technique and reconstruction algorithm | Key advantages of the method/ findings of the study | Limitations | Activity quantification errors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Planar | In-111 | 171±7%; 245±7% | Physical phantom and MCS | Critical organs and tumors | AC (projection of CT); SC (TEW: 152±4%, 205±10%); CDR; background and overlapping correction; | CPlanar method with full compensations | Organs overlap | Phantom: liver: -2.51%; heart: -3.21%; lungs: -17.22%; large sphere: -7.02%; small sphere: -28.95%; | |
| AC (projection of CT); SC (TEW: 152±4%, 205±10%); CDR; OS-EM. | QPlanar method partially solves organ overlap problem and allows more accurate modelling of image degradation factors | Required alignment between 3D organ VOIs and 2D planar projections; | Phantom: liver: 3.22%; heart: 0.90%; lungs 7.61%; large sphere: -1.16%; small sphere: -0.59%; | ||||||
| MCS and patient study | Critical organs | AC (CT); SC (TEW: 152±4%, 205±10%); CDR; OS-EM. | EQPlanar method combines whole body and individual organ rigid registration with background separation, partially improves the QPlanar method | Inferior quantification of small objects, e.g. tumors; | MCS: <-7.12% for all organs; | ||||
| QSPECT | RSD torso phantom and MCS | Critical organs and tumors | AC (CT); SC (ESSE); CDR; PVC (pGTM) ; OS-EM. | Proposed a comprehensive SPECT quantitation method with model-based compensation methods | Assumed uniform uptake within each ROI when pGTM PVC modeling; | MCS: <5% for all organs except for lungs (11.47%); | |||
| I-131 | 364±10% | MCS | Critical organs | AC (CT); SC (ESSE); CDR OS-EM. | Proposed model based down-scatter compensation for high energy photons | Increased computation comlexity | MCS: <2.5% for all organs, except for bone marrow (-9.33%) | ||
| Lu-177 | 208±10% | Physical phantom and patient study | Tumors and critical organs | AC (CT); SC (APDI); OS-EM. | Investigated the feasibility and reliability of individualized dosimetry based on SPECT | No CDR and PVC was attempted; | Phantom: large tumors: (>16 ml) <20%; small tumors: (2.6 ml) <30%; | ||
| Ho-166 | 81±7.5% | Patient study | Tumors and critical organs | AC (CT); SC (TEW: 118±6% for down-scatter correction); OS-EM. | First validated the feasibility of quantitative MR imaging in TRT dosimetry by comparing with QSPECT result | MR should be imaged twice: before therapy (for anatomical info.); | Patient: * | ||
| Bremsstrahlung Imaging | Y-90 | 55-285 | Physical phantom | Critical organs and tumors | AC (linear effective coefficient or transmission scans); SC and septal penetration compensation | Use a Wiener filter to compensate for scatter and septal penetration | Simple geometry for physical phantom with homogeneous background and no overlapping sources | Phantom: individual activities <17% and cumulated activities <8% for all organs | |
| 100-500 | Physical rod source phantom and MCS | Tumorsand critical organs | AC (CT); SC (ESSE); CDR; OS-EM. | Proposed a multi-range scatter and CDR modeling method | Increased computation complexity | MSC: <12 % for all organs; | |||
| PET | Y-86 | 350-650 | Physical phantom and patient study | Tumors and critical organs | AC (transmission scans); SC (sinograms convolution); dead time correction; OS-EM. | Proposed a patient dependent sinograms convolution based correction method for SC and PGC by providing tail fitting with PSF library | The count level reduced causing reduced SNR | Phantom: background: 9%; kidneys: 5%; | |
| I-124 | Physical thyroid phantom and rats | Tumors | AC (CT); dead time correction; FBP. | Used PET/CT for TRT dosimetry and validated it with phantom and small animal studies | Relative low positron emission of I-124 (~23%) degraded the image quality | Phantom: large sphere (250 ml): 2.86%; medium sphere (125 ml): 6.57%; small sphere (31 ml): -1.08%; | |||
| Y-90 | Physical phantom and patient study | Tumors | Resolution recovery algorithm (TrueX); standard AC, SC, PVC and PGC correction; OS-EM. | TOF PET improved the contrast of hot-spheres | Slight deterioration | Phantom: total activity error 5%; large hot sphere: 8%; background: 1%; |
Note: *For the clinical and preclinical study, no quantification errors were shown since the gold standard was unknown. **True activity=injected dose - activity in urine collections