Literature DB >> 29439017

Comparative Dosimetry for 68Ga-DOTATATE: Impact of Using Updated ICRP Phantoms, S Values, and Tissue-Weighting Factors.

Anders Josefsson1, Robert F Hobbs1,2, Sagar Ranka1, Bryan C Schwarz3, Donika Plyku1, Jose Willegaignon de Amorim de Carvalho4, Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel4, Marcelo Tatit Sapienza4, Wesley E Bolch3, George Sgouros5.   

Abstract

The data that have been used in almost all calculations of MIRD S value absorbed dose and effective dose are based on stylized anatomic computational phantoms and tissue-weighting factors adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in its publication 60. The more anatomically realistic phantoms that have recently become available are likely to provide more accurate effective doses for diagnostic agents. 68Ga-DOTATATE is a radiolabeled somatostatin analog that binds with high affinity to somatostatin receptors, which are overexpressed in neuroendocrine tumors and can be used for diagnostic PET/CT-based imaging. Several studies have reported effective doses for 68Ga-DOTATATE using the stylized Cristy-Eckerman (CE) phantoms from 1987; here, we present effective dose calculations using both the ICRP 60 and more updated formalisms.
Methods: Whole-body PET/CT scans were acquired for 16 patients after 68Ga-DOTATATE administration. Contours were drawn on the CT images for spleen, liver, kidneys, adrenal glands, brain, heart, lungs, thyroid gland, salivary glands, testes, red marrow (L1-L5), muscle (right thigh), and whole body. Dosimetric calculations were based on the CE phantoms and the more recent ICRP 110 reference-voxel phantoms. Tissue-weighting factors from ICRP 60 and ICRP 103 were used in effective dose calculations for the CE phantoms and ICRP 110 phantoms, respectively.
Results: The highest absorbed dose coefficients (absorbed dose per unit activity) were, in descending order, in the spleen, pituitary gland, kidneys, adrenal glands, and liver. For ICRP 110 phantoms with tissue-weighting factors from ICRP 103, the effective dose coefficient was 0.023 ± 0.003 mSv/MBq, which was significantly lower than the 0.027 ± 0.005 mSv/MBq calculated for CE phantoms with tissue-weighting factors from ICRP 60. One of the largest differences in estimated absorbed dose coefficients was for the urinary bladder wall, at 0.040 ± 0.011 mGy/MBq for ICRP 110 phantoms compared with 0.090 ± 0.032 mGy/MBq for CE phantoms.
Conclusion: This study showed that the effective dose coefficient was slightly overestimated for CE phantoms, compared with ICRP 110 phantoms using the latest tissue-weighting factors from ICRP 103. The more detailed handling of electron transport in the latest phantom calculations gives significant differences in estimates of the absorbed dose to stem cells in the walled organs of the alimentary tract.
© 2018 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

Entities:  

Keywords:  68Ga-DOTATATE; PET/CT imaging; dosimetry; effective dose; normal tissue

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29439017      PMCID: PMC6071503          DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.117.203893

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  15 in total

1.  Procedure guidelines for PET/CT tumour imaging with 68Ga-DOTA-conjugated peptides: 68Ga-DOTA-TOC, 68Ga-DOTA-NOC, 68Ga-DOTA-TATE.

Authors:  Irene Virgolini; Valentina Ambrosini; Jamshed B Bomanji; Richard P Baum; Stefano Fanti; Michael Gabriel; Nikolaos D Papathanasiou; Giovanna Pepe; Wim Oyen; Clemens De Cristoforo; Arturo Chiti
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2007

3.  MIRD pamphlet No. 21: a generalized schema for radiopharmaceutical dosimetry--standardization of nomenclature.

Authors:  Wesley E Bolch; Keith F Eckerman; George Sgouros; Stephen R Thomas
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  ICRP Publication 107. Nuclear decay data for dosimetric calculations.

Authors:  K Eckerman; A Endo
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2008

5.  ICRP Publication 110. Realistic reference phantoms: an ICRP/ICRU joint effort. A report of adult reference computational phantoms.

Authors:  Hans-Georg Menzel; Christopher Clement; Paul DeLuca
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2009

6.  Calculating dose from remaining body activity: a comparison of two methods.

Authors:  J L Coffey; E E Watson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1979 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  OLINDA/EXM: the second-generation personal computer software for internal dose assessment in nuclear medicine.

Authors:  Michael G Stabin; Richard B Sparks; Eric Crowe
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 8.  Radiation dosimetry in nuclear medicine.

Authors:  M G Stabin; M Tagesson; S R Thomas; M Ljungberg; S E Strand
Journal:  Appl Radiat Isot       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 1.513

9.  Evaluation of absorbed and effective doses to patients from radiopharmaceuticals using the ICRP 110 reference computational phantoms and ICRP 103 formulation.

Authors:  Lama Hadid; Anna Gardumi; Aurélie Desbrée
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2013-03-22       Impact factor: 0.972

10.  Measured human dosimetry of 68Ga-DOTATATE.

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

View more
  2 in total

1.  Re-evaluation of pediatric 18F-FDG dosimetry: Cristy-Eckerman versus UF/NCI hybrid computational phantoms.

Authors:  Kitiwat Khamwan; Shannon E O'Reilly; Donika Plyku; Alison Goodkind; Anders Josefsson; Xinhua Cao; Frederic H Fahey; S Ted Treves; Wesley E Bolch; George Sgouros
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Preliminary evaluation of alpha-emitting radioembolization in animal models of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Yong Du; Angel Cortez; Anders Josefsson; Mohammadreza Zarisfi; Rebecca Krimins; Eleni Liapi; Jessie R Nedrow
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.