UNLABELLED: This article presents dosimetry based on the measurement of fluoro-DOPA activity in major tissues and in the bladder contents in humans after oral pretreatment with 100 mg carbidopa. METHODS: Bladder activity was measured continuously by external probe and calibrated using complete urine collections. Quantitative dynamic PET scans provided time-activity curves for the major organs. Bladder wall dosimetry was calculated using the methods of MIRD Pamphlet No. 14. Effective dose was calculated as described in ICRP Publication 60. RESULTS: Mean absorbed dose to the bladder wall surface per unit administered activity was 0.150 mGy/MBq (0.556 rad/mCi) with the realistic void schedule used in our studies. The dose was 0.027 mGy/MBq (0.101 rad/mCi) to the kidneys, 0.0197 mGy/MBq (0.0728 rad/mCi) to the pancreas, and 0.0186 mGy/MBq (0.0688 rad/mCi) to the uterus. Absorbed doses to other organs were an order of magnitude or more lower than the bladder, 0.009-0.015 mGy/MBq. The effective dose per unit administered activity was 0.0199 mSv/MBq (0.0735 rem/mCi.) CONCLUSION: Urinary excretion of fluoro-DOPA was altered significantly by pretreatment with carbidopa. In general, any manipulation of tracer metabolism in the body should be expected to produce changes in biodistribution and dosimetry. The largest radiation dose was to the bladder wall, for which our estimate was one-fifth of that from the original report. The methods used reflect realistic urinary physiology and typical use of this tracer. The principles of MIRD Pamphlet No. 14 should be used in planning studies using tracers excreted in the urine to minimize the absorbed dose.
UNLABELLED: This article presents dosimetry based on the measurement of fluoro-DOPA activity in major tissues and in the bladder contents in humans after oral pretreatment with 100 mg carbidopa. METHODS: Bladder activity was measured continuously by external probe and calibrated using complete urine collections. Quantitative dynamic PET scans provided time-activity curves for the major organs. Bladder wall dosimetry was calculated using the methods of MIRD Pamphlet No. 14. Effective dose was calculated as described in ICRP Publication 60. RESULTS: Mean absorbed dose to the bladder wall surface per unit administered activity was 0.150 mGy/MBq (0.556 rad/mCi) with the realistic void schedule used in our studies. The dose was 0.027 mGy/MBq (0.101 rad/mCi) to the kidneys, 0.0197 mGy/MBq (0.0728 rad/mCi) to the pancreas, and 0.0186 mGy/MBq (0.0688 rad/mCi) to the uterus. Absorbed doses to other organs were an order of magnitude or more lower than the bladder, 0.009-0.015 mGy/MBq. The effective dose per unit administered activity was 0.0199 mSv/MBq (0.0735 rem/mCi.) CONCLUSION: Urinary excretion of fluoro-DOPA was altered significantly by pretreatment with carbidopa. In general, any manipulation of tracer metabolism in the body should be expected to produce changes in biodistribution and dosimetry. The largest radiation dose was to the bladder wall, for which our estimate was one-fifth of that from the original report. The methods used reflect realistic urinary physiology and typical use of this tracer. The principles of MIRD Pamphlet No. 14 should be used in planning studies using tracers excreted in the urine to minimize the absorbed dose.
Authors: Catherine L Gallagher; Bradley T Christian; James E Holden; Onofre T Dejesus; Robert J Nickles; Laura Buyan-Dent; Barbara B Bendlin; Sandra J Harding; Charles K Stone; Barb Mueller; Sterling C Johnson Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2011-06-02 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Garth E Terry; Jussi Hirvonen; Jeih-San Liow; Nicholas Seneca; Johannes T Tauscher; John M Schaus; Lee Phebus; Christian C Felder; Cheryl L Morse; Victor W Pike; Christer Halldin; Robert B Innis Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-03-24 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: David R Sprague; Frederick T Chin; Jeih-San Liow; Masahiro Fujita; H Donald Burns; Richard Hargreaves; James B Stubbs; Victor W Pike; Robert B Innis; P David Mozley Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Zvi Bar-Sever; Lorenzo Biassoni; Barry Shulkin; Grace Kong; Michael S Hofman; Egesta Lopci; Irina Manea; Jacek Koziorowski; Rita Castellani; Ariane Boubaker; Bieke Lambert; Thomas Pfluger; Helen Nadel; Susan Sharp; Francesco Giammarile Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Yasuyuki Kimura; Fabrice G Siméon; Jun Hatazawa; P David Mozley; Victor W Pike; Robert B Innis; Masahiro Fujita Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: David Taïeb; Henri J Timmers; Elif Hindié; Benjamin A Guillet; Hartmut P Neumann; Martin K Walz; Giuseppe Opocher; Wouter W de Herder; Carsten C Boedeker; Ronald R de Krijger; Arturo Chiti; Adil Al-Nahhas; Karel Pacak; Domenico Rubello Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-08-28 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Tuula Tolvanen; Timo Yli-Kerttula; Tiina Ujula; Anu Autio; Pertti Lehikoinen; Heikki Minn; Anne Roivainen Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-01-13 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: F Bretin; T Mauxion; G Warnock; M A Bahri; L Libert; C Lemaire; A Luxen; M Bardiès; A Seret; A Plenevaux Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Helle-Brit Fiebrich; Johan R de Jong; Ido P Kema; Klaas Pieter Koopmans; Wim Sluiter; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Annemiek M Walenkamp; Thera P Links; Adrienne H Brouwers; Elisabeth G E de Vries Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-06-23 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Uta Eberlein; Jörn Hendrik Bröer; Charlot Vandevoorde; Paula Santos; Manuel Bardiès; Klaus Bacher; Dietmar Nosske; Michael Lassmann Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 9.236