Neeta Pandit-Taskar1,2, Pat B Zanzonico3,4, Kim Kramer5, Milan Grkovski4, Edward K Fung4, Weiji Shi6, Zhigang Zhang6, Serge K Lyashchenko7, Alex M Fung3, Keith S Pentlow4, Jorge A Carrasquillo3, Jason S Lewis3,2,7, Steven M Larson3,8, Nai-Kong V Cheung5, John L Humm3,4. 1. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York pandit-n@mskcc.org. 2. Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 3. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 4. Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 5. Department of Pediatrics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 6. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 7. Radiochemistry and Molecular Imaging Probe Core, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; and. 8. Molecular Pharmacology Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Abstract
Radiation dose estimations are key for optimizing therapies. We studied the role of 124I-omburtamab (8H9) given intraventricularly in assessing the distribution and radiation doses before 131I-omburtamab therapy in patients with metastatic leptomeningeal disease and compared it with the estimates from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sampling. Methods: Patients with histologically proven malignancy and metastatic disease to the central nervous system or leptomeninges who met eligibility criteria for 131I-omburtamab therapy underwent immuno-PET imaging with 124I-8H9 followed by 131I-8H9 antibody therapy. Patients were imaged with approximately 74 MBq of intraventricular 124I-omburtamab via an Ommaya reservoir. Whole-body PET images were acquired at approximately 4, 24, and 48 h after administration and analyzed for dosimetry calculations. Peripheral blood and CSF samples were obtained at multiple time points for dosimetry estimation. Results: Forty-two patients with complete dosimetry and therapy data were analyzed. 124I-omburtamab PET-based radiation dosimetry estimations revealed mean (±SD) absorbed dose to the CSF for 131I-8H9 of 0.62 ± 0.40 cGy/MBq, compared with 2.22 ± 2.19 cGy/MBq based on 124I-omburtamab CSF samples and 1.53 ± 1.37 cGy/MBq based on 131I-omburtamab CSF samples. The mean absorbed dose to the blood was 0.051 ± 0.11 cGy/MBq for 124I-omburtamab samples and 0.07 ± 0.04 cGy/MBq for 131I-omburtamab samples. The effective whole-body radiation dose for 124I-omburtamab was 0.49 ± 0.27 mSv/MBq. The mean whole-body clearance half-time was 44.98 ± 16.29 h. Conclusion: PET imaging with 124I-omburtamab antibody administered intraventricularly allows for noninvasive estimation of dose to CSF and normal organs. High CSF-to-blood absorbed-dose ratios are noted, allowing for an improved therapeutic index to leptomeningeal disease and reduced systemic doses. PET imaging-based estimates were less variable and more reliable than CSF sample-based dosimetry.
Radiation dose estimations are key for optimizing therapies. We studied the role of 124I-omburtamab (8H9) given intraventricularly in assessing the distribution and radiation doses before 131I-omburtamab therapy in patients with metastatic leptomeningeal disease and compared it with the estimates from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sampling. Methods:Patients with histologically proven malignancy and metastatic disease to the central nervous system or leptomeninges who met eligibility criteria for 131I-omburtamab therapy underwent immuno-PET imaging with 124I-8H9 followed by 131I-8H9 antibody therapy. Patients were imaged with approximately 74 MBq of intraventricular 124I-omburtamab via an Ommaya reservoir. Whole-body PET images were acquired at approximately 4, 24, and 48 h after administration and analyzed for dosimetry calculations. Peripheral blood and CSF samples were obtained at multiple time points for dosimetry estimation. Results: Forty-two patients with complete dosimetry and therapy data were analyzed. 124I-omburtamab PET-based radiation dosimetry estimations revealed mean (±SD) absorbed dose to the CSF for 131I-8H9 of 0.62 ± 0.40 cGy/MBq, compared with 2.22 ± 2.19 cGy/MBq based on 124I-omburtamab CSF samples and 1.53 ± 1.37 cGy/MBq based on 131I-omburtamab CSF samples. The mean absorbed dose to the blood was 0.051 ± 0.11 cGy/MBq for 124I-omburtamab samples and 0.07 ± 0.04 cGy/MBq for 131I-omburtamab samples. The effective whole-body radiation dose for 124I-omburtamab was 0.49 ± 0.27 mSv/MBq. The mean whole-body clearance half-time was 44.98 ± 16.29 h. Conclusion: PET imaging with 124I-omburtamab antibody administered intraventricularly allows for noninvasive estimation of dose to CSF and normal organs. High CSF-to-blood absorbed-dose ratios are noted, allowing for an improved therapeutic index to leptomeningeal disease and reduced systemic doses. PET imaging-based estimates were less variable and more reliable than CSF sample-based dosimetry.
Authors: Gamal Akabani; David A Reardon; R Edward Coleman; Terence Z Wong; Scott D Metzler; James E Bowsher; Daniel P Barboriak; James M Provenzale; Kim L Greer; David DeLong; Henry S Friedman; Allan H Friedman; Xiao-Guang Zhao; Charles N Pegram; Roger E McLendon; Darell D Bigner; Michael R Zalutsky Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: N K Cheung; B H Kushner; I Y Cheung; K Kramer; A Canete; W Gerald; M A Bonilla; R Finn; S J Yeh; S M Larson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kim Kramer; Brian H Kushner; Shakeel Modak; Neeta Pandit-Taskar; Peter Smith-Jones; Pat Zanzonico; John L Humm; Hong Xu; Suzanne L Wolden; Mark M Souweidane; Steven M Larson; Nai-Kong V Cheung Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2009-11-05 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Kim Kramer; John L Humm; Mark M Souweidane; Pat B Zanzonico; Ira J Dunkel; William L Gerald; Yasmin Khakoo; Samuel D Yeh; Henry W Yeung; Ronald D Finn; Suzanne L Wolden; Steven M Larson; Nai-Kong V Cheung Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-12-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ken Herrmann; Markus Schwaiger; Jason S Lewis; Stephen B Solomon; Barbara J McNeil; Michael Baumann; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Hedvig Hricak; Ralph Weissleder Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Milan Grkovski; Shakeel Modak; Pat B Zanzonico; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Steven M Larson; John L Humm; Neeta Pandit-Taskar Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-12-02 Impact factor: 11.082
Authors: Rahul S Yerrabelli; Ping He; Edward K Fung; Kim Kramer; Pat B Zanzonico; John L Humm; Hongfen Guo; Neeta Pandit-Taskar; Steven M Larson; Nai-Kong V Cheung Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-10-13 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Shakeel Modak; Pat Zanzonico; Milan Grkovski; Emily K Slotkin; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Serge K Lyashchenko; Jason S Lewis; Irene Y Cheung; Todd Heaton; Michael P LaQuaglia; Nai-Kong V Cheung; Neeta Pandit-Taskar Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 44.544