| Literature DB >> 30294746 |
Robert K Doot1, Jacob G Dubroff2, Joshua S Scheuermann2, Kyle J Labban2, Jenny Cai2, Chia-Ju Hsieh2, Shihong Li2, Hsiaoju Lee2, Erin K Schubert2, Catherine Hou2, Regan Sheffer2, Alexander Schmitz2, Kuiying Xu2, Robert H Mach2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: [18F]Fluortriopride (FTP) was developed as a dopamine D3-selective radiotracer, thought to be important to neurobiological reward pathways and implicated in drug addiction, Parkinson's disease, and schizophrenia. Preclinical radiation dosimetry studies found the gallbladder wall received the highest dose. A gallbladder dose reduction intervention was simulated using a novel reduction model for healthy adults following fatty-meal consumption. The goals of this study were to assess whole body FTP human dosimetry and determine the feasibility of reducing absorbed dose to the gallbladder wall.Entities:
Keywords: Dopamine; Dosimetry; Gallbladder absorbed dose; PET; [18F]fluortriopride
Year: 2018 PMID: 30294746 PMCID: PMC6174116 DOI: 10.1186/s40658-018-0219-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EJNMMI Phys ISSN: 2197-7364
Fig. 1Population gallbladder clearance curve for healthy adults with standard deviation error bars
Mean FTP radiation dose estimates for the control group (mSv/MBq, n = 10)
| Target organ | Mean | Standard deviation |
|---|---|---|
| Adrenals | 1.48E−02 | 1.36E−03 |
| Brain | 4.77E−03 | 9.51E−04 |
| Breasts | 6.06E−03 | 7.53E−04 |
| Gallbladder wall | 4.36E−01 | 1.77E−01 |
| Lower large intestine wall | 3.38E−02 | 8.95E−03 |
| Small intestine | 8.68E−02 | 2.54E−02 |
| Stomach wall | 1.32E−02 | 1.19E−03 |
| Upper large intestine wall | 1.00E−01 | 2.91E−02 |
| Heart wall | 1.63E−02 | 2.85E−03 |
| Kidneys | 2.73E−02 | 3.47E−03 |
| Liver | 6.50E−02 | 1.05E−02 |
| Lungs | 2.70E−02 | 1.31E−02 |
| Muscle | 8.41E−03 | 3.01E−04 |
| Ovaries | 1.99E−02 | 3.88E−03 |
| Pancreas | 1.79E−02 | 2.32E−03 |
| Red marrow | 1.52E−02 | 7.40E−04 |
| Osteogenic cells | 1.28E−02 | 7.21E−04 |
| Skin | 5.15E−03 | 2.56E−04 |
| Spleen | 3.76E−02 | 3.47E−02 |
| Testes | 5.43E−03 | 2.80E−04 |
| Thymus | 6.81E−03 | 9.35E−04 |
| Thyroid | 5.32E−03 | 5.87E−04 |
| Urinary bladder wall | 1.91E−02 | 5.15E−03 |
| Uterus | 1.66E−02 | 2.74E−03 |
| Total body | 1.15E−02 | 5.50E−04 |
| Effective dose equivalent | 5.55E−02 | 1.12E−02 |
| Effective dose | 2.25E−02 | 2.20E−03 |
Fig. 2FTP percent injected dose measures over time for the control group
Fig. 3Subject 8’s gallbladder dose without a meal (a) and simulated dose with a fatty meal (b). Legend: Example of the gallbladder dose in an individual volunteer without a fatty meal (a) and simulated gallbladder dose for the same patient after consumption of a fatty meal at 80 min to match this subject’s intervention consumption time (b) where the extrapolated no meal curve is based upon an exponential decay fit to the last two experimental data points. The dark gray area under the curve represents experimentally collected data, whereas the light gray shaded area in a represents the predicted portion of the dose. The striped area under the curve in b illustrates the predicted dose using the fatty meal simulation. Difference in total shaded areas under the curve in a and b represent a change in dose received by the gallbladder with the addition of a fatty meal
Fig. 4Maximum intensity pixel PET images for volunteer 8 in both control and intervention groups. Legend: The upper row of images shows the original scans, while the lower image set details the gallbladder contraction over time following a fatty meal during the volunteer’s repeat scan
Mean FTP radiation dose estimates for the intervention group (mSv/MBq, n = 4)
| Target organ | Mean | Standard deviation |
|---|---|---|
| Adrenals | 1.34E−02 | 8.91E−04 |
| Brain | 4.37E−03 | 7.43E−04 |
| Breast | 6.11E−03 | 6.25E−04 |
| Gallbladder wall | 1.25E−01 | 8.41E−02 |
| Lower large intestine wall | 5.04E−02 | 1.12E−02 |
| Small intestine | 1.32E−01 | 3.19E−02 |
| Stomach wall | 1.40E−02 | 4.80E−04 |
| Upper large intestine wall | 1.51E−01 | 3.63E−02 |
| Heart wall | 1.93E−02 | 2.17E−03 |
| Kidneys | 2.57E−02 | 3.58E−03 |
| Liver | 5.76E−02 | 8.28E−03 |
| Lungs | 2.93E−02 | 1.22E−02 |
| Muscle | 8.84E−03 | 1.49E−04 |
| Ovaries | 2.70E−02 | 4.78E−03 |
| Pancreas | 1.54E−02 | 9.68E−04 |
| Red marrow | 1.04E−02 | 5.51E−04 |
| Osteogenic cells | 1.02E−02 | 3.39E−04 |
| Skin | 5.37E−03 | 1.96E−04 |
| Spleen | 3.09E−02 | 1.11E−02 |
| Testes | 5.84E−03 | 2.15E−04 |
| Thymus | 7.03E−03 | 7.49E−04 |
| Thyroid | 5.43E−03 | 4.62E−04 |
| Urinary bladder wall | 1.57E−02 | 4.16E−03 |
| Uterus | 2.14E−02 | 3.07E−03 |
| Total body | 1.22E−02 | 3.92E−04 |
| Effective dose equivalent | 4.40E−02 | 2.48E−03 |
| Effective dose | 2.67E−02 | 3.13E−03 |
Comparing control, simulation, and intervention groups (mSv/MBq)
| Target organ | Control | Simulation | Intervention | Percent change: control vs. intervention |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gallbladder | 0.436 | 0.142 | 0.125 | − 71.3 |
| Upper large intestine | 0.100 | 0.125 | 0.151 | 51.0 |
| Lower large intestine | 0.034 | 0.042 | 0.050 | 47.1 |
| Small intestine | 0.087 | 0.109 | 0.132 | 51.7 |
| Effective dose | 0.023 | 0.025 | 0.027 | 17.4 |
Fig. 5Comparisons of regional doses between control, simulation, and intervention groups. Legend: Asterisks indicate groups whose mean regional absorbed radiation doses are significantly different from the control group for that region using Tukey HSD analysis (P ≤ 0.027). Note that simulation and intervention groups were not significantly different for any of the regions shown (P ≥ 0.329)