Yusuf Menda1, Mark T Madsen2, Thomas M O'Dorisio3, John J Sunderland2, G Leonard Watkins2, Joseph S Dillon3, Sarah L Mott4, Michael K Schultz2, Gideon K D Zamba5, David L Bushnell2, M Sue O'Dorisio6. 1. Department of Radiology, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa yusuf-menda@uiowa.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 4. Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 5. Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; and. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.
Abstract
Pretherapy PET with 86Y-DOTATOC is considered the ideal dosimetry protocol for 90Y-DOTATOC therapy; however, its cost, limited availability, and need for infusion of amino acids to mimic the therapy administration limit its use in the clinical setting. The goal of this study was to develop a dosimetric method for 90Y-DOTATOC using 90Y-DOTATOC PET/CT and bremsstrahlung SPECT/CT and to determine whether dosimetry-based administered activities differ significantly from standard administered activities. Methods: This was a prospective phase 2 trial of 90Y-DOTATOC therapy in patients with somatostatin receptor-positive tumors. 90Y-DOTATOC was given in 3 cycles 6-8 wk apart. In the first cycle of therapy, adults received 4.4 GBq and children received 1.85 GBq/m2; the subsequent administered activities were adjusted according to the dosimetry of the preceding cycle so as not to exceed a total kidney dose of 23 Gy and bone marrow dose of 2 Gy. The radiation dose to the kidneys was determined from serial imaging sessions consisting of time-of-flight 90Y-DOTATOC PET/CT at 5 h after therapy and 90Y-DOTATOC bremsstrahlung SPECT/CT at 6, 24, 48, and 72 h. The PET/CT data were used to measure the absolute concentration of 90Y-DOTATOC and to calibrate the bremsstrahlung SPECT kidney clearance data. The radiation dose to the kidneys was determined by multiplying the time-integrated activity (from the fitted biexponential curve of renal clearance of 90Y-DOTATOC) with the energy emitted per decay, divided by the mass of the kidneys. Results: The radiation dose to the kidneys per cycle of 90Y-DOTATOC therapy was highly variable among patients, ranging from 0.32 to 3.0 mGy/MBq. In 17 (85%) of the 20 adult patients who received the second and the third treatment cycles of 90Y-DOTATOC, the administered activity was modified by at least 20% from the starting administered activity. Conclusion: Renal dosimetry of 90Y-DOTATOC is feasible using 90Y-DOTATOC time-of-flight PET/CT and bremsstrahlung SPECT/CT and has a significant impact on the administered activity in treatment cycles.
Pretherapy PET with 86Y-DOTATOC is considered the ideal dosimetry protocol for 90Y-DOTATOC therapy; however, its cost, limited availability, and need for infusion of amino acids to mimic the therapy administration limit its use in the clinical setting. The goal of this study was to develop a dosimetric method for 90Y-DOTATOC using 90Y-DOTATOC PET/CT and bremsstrahlung SPECT/CT and to determine whether dosimetry-based administered activities differ significantly from standard administered activities. Methods: This was a prospective phase 2 trial of 90Y-DOTATOC therapy in patients with somatostatin receptor-positive tumors. 90Y-DOTATOC was given in 3 cycles 6-8 wk apart. In the first cycle of therapy, adults received 4.4 GBq and children received 1.85 GBq/m2; the subsequent administered activities were adjusted according to the dosimetry of the preceding cycle so as not to exceed a total kidney dose of 23 Gy and bone marrow dose of 2 Gy. The radiation dose to the kidneys was determined from serial imaging sessions consisting of time-of-flight 90Y-DOTATOC PET/CT at 5 h after therapy and 90Y-DOTATOC bremsstrahlung SPECT/CT at 6, 24, 48, and 72 h. The PET/CT data were used to measure the absolute concentration of 90Y-DOTATOC and to calibrate the bremsstrahlung SPECT kidney clearance data. The radiation dose to the kidneys was determined by multiplying the time-integrated activity (from the fitted biexponential curve of renal clearance of 90Y-DOTATOC) with the energy emitted per decay, divided by the mass of the kidneys. Results: The radiation dose to the kidneys per cycle of 90Y-DOTATOC therapy was highly variable among patients, ranging from 0.32 to 3.0 mGy/MBq. In 17 (85%) of the 20 adult patients who received the second and the third treatment cycles of 90Y-DOTATOC, the administered activity was modified by at least 20% from the starting administered activity. Conclusion: Renal dosimetry of 90Y-DOTATOC is feasible using 90Y-DOTATOC time-of-flight PET/CT and bremsstrahlung SPECT/CT and has a significant impact on the administered activity in treatment cycles.
Authors: François Jamar; Raffaella Barone; Isabelle Mathieu; Stéphan Walrand; Daniel Labar; Pascal Carlier; Joëlle de Camps; Horst Schran; TianLing Chen; M Charles Smith; Hakim Bouterfa; Roelf Valkema; Eric P Krenning; Larry K Kvols; Stanislas Pauwels Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2003-02-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: D J Kwekkeboom; W H Bakker; P P Kooij; M W Konijnenberg; A Srinivasan; J L Erion; M A Schmidt; J L Bugaj; M de Jong; E P Krenning Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Date: 2001-09
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: David Bushnell; Yusuf Menda; Thomas O'Dorisio; Mark Madsen; Sara Miller; Thomas Carlisle; Shayne Squires; Daniel Kahn; Wayne Walkner; Mary Connolly; Sue O'Dorisio; Mark Karwal; James Ponto; Hakim Bouterfa Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.099
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: Erik Vegt; Marleen Melis; Annemarie Eek; Monique de Visser; Maarten Brom; Wim J G Oyen; Martin Gotthardt; Marion de Jong; Otto C Boerman Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-12-18 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: Youngho Seo; Yoonsuk Huh; Shih-Ying Huang; J Miguel Hernandez-Pampaloni; Randall A Hawkins; W Clay Gustafson; Kieuhoa T Vo; Katherine K Matthay Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Song Xue; Andrei Gafita; Chao Dong; Yu Zhao; Giles Tetteh; Bjoern H Menze; Sibylle Ziegler; Wolfgang Weber; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Axel Rominger; Matthias Eiber; Kuangyu Shi Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: David L Bushnell; Kellie L Bodeker; Thomas M O'Dorisio; Mark T Madsen; Yusuf Menda; Stephen Graves; Gideon K D Zamba; M Sue O'Dorisio Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-01-30 Impact factor: 10.057