Literature DB >> 30022768

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

Kitiwat Khamwan1, Shannon E O'Reilly, Donika Plyku, Alison Goodkind, Anders Josefsson, Xinhua Cao, Frederic H Fahey, S Ted Treves, Wesley E Bolch, George Sgouros.   

Abstract

Because of the concerns associated with radiation exposure at a young age, there is an increased interest in pediatric absorbed dose estimates for imaging agents. Almost all reported pediatric absorbed dose estimates, however, have been determined using adult pharmacokinetic data with radionuclide S values that take into account the anatomical differences between adults and children based upon the older Cristy-Eckerman (C-E) stylized phantoms. In this work, we use pediatric model-derived pharmacokinetics to compare absorbed dose and effective dose estimates for 18F-FDG in pediatric patients using S values generated from two different geometries of computational phantoms. Time-integrated activity coefficients of 18F-FDG in brain, lungs, heart wall, kidneys and liver, retrospectively, calculated from 35 pediatric patients at the Boston's Children Hospital were used. The absorbed dose calculation was performed in accordance with the Medical Internal Radiation Dose method using S values generated from the University of Florida/National Cancer Institute (UF/NCI) hybrid phantoms, as well as those from C-E stylized computational phantoms. The effective dose was computed using tissue-weighting factors from ICRP Publication 60 and ICRP Publication 103 for the C-E and UF/NCI, respectively. Substantial differences in the absorbed dose estimates between UF/NCI hybrid pediatric phantoms and the C-E stylized phantoms were found for the lungs, ovaries, red bone marrow and urinary bladder wall. Large discrepancies in the calculated dose values were observed in the bone marrow; ranging between  -26% to  +199%. The effective doses computed by the UF/NCI hybrid phantom S values were slightly different than those seen using the C-E stylized phantoms with percent differences of  -0.7%, 2.9% and  2.5% for a newborn, 1 year old and 5 year old, respectively. Differences in anatomical modeling features among computational phantoms used to perform Monte Carlo-based photon and electron transport simulations for 18F, and very likely for other radionuclides, impact internal organ dosimetry computations for pediatric nuclear medicine studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30022768      PMCID: PMC6398606          DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aad47a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  27 in total

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

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2007

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

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

3.  2016 Update of the North American Consensus Guidelines for Pediatric Administered Radiopharmaceutical Activities.

Authors:  S Ted Treves; Michael J Gelfand; Frederic H Fahey; Marguerite T Parisi
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 4.  Basic principles in the radiation dosimetry of nuclear medicine.

Authors:  Michael Stabin; Xie George Xu
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.446

5.  Pediatric Radiopharmaceutical Administration: harmonization of the 2007 EANM Paediatric Dosage Card (Version 1.5.2008) and the 2010 North American Consensus guideline.

Authors:  Michael Lassmann; S Ted Treves
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Standardization of administered activities in paediatric nuclear medicine: the EANM perspective.

Authors:  Michael Lassmann; Uta Eberlein; Egesta Lopci; Arturo Chiti
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-08-06       Impact factor: 9.236

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

Authors:  Anders Josefsson; Robert F Hobbs; Sagar Ranka; Bryan C Schwarz; Donika Plyku; Jose Willegaignon de Amorim de Carvalho; Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel; Marcelo Tatit Sapienza; Wesley E Bolch; George Sgouros
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Evaluation of radiation dose to anthropomorphic paediatric models from positron-emitting labelled tracers.

Authors:  Tianwu Xie; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Creation of two tomographic voxel models of paediatric patients in the first year of life.

Authors:  J C Nipper; J L Williams; W E Bolch
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2002-09-07       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Pharmacokinetic modeling of [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) for premature infants, and newborns through 5-year-olds.

Authors:  Kitiwat Khamwan; Donika Plyku; Shannon E O'Reilly; Alison Goodkind; Xinhua Cao; Frederic H Fahey; S Ted Treves; Wesley E Bolch; George Sgouros
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.138

View more
  3 in total

1.  Image quality and lesion detectability in low-dose pediatric 18F-FDG scans using total-body PET/CT.

Authors:  Yu-Mo Zhao; Ying-He Li; Tao Chen; Wei-Guang Zhang; Lin-Hao Wang; Jiatai Feng; Chenwei Li; Xu Zhang; Wei Fan; Ying-Ying Hu
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Patient-adapted organ absorbed dose and effective dose estimates in pediatric 18F-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography studies.

Authors:  Brian M Quinn; Yiming Gao; Usman Mahmood; Neeta Pandit-Taskar; Gerald Behr; Pat Zanzonico; Lawrence T Dauer
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 1.930

3.  Investigating Low-Dose Image Quality in Whole-Body Pediatric 18F-FDG Scans Using Time-of-Flight PET/MRI.

Authors:  Jeffrey P Schmall; Suleman Surti; Hansel J Otero; Sabah Servaes; Joel S Karp; Lisa J States
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 11.082

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.