Abstract

BackgroundThis study aims to assess both feasibility and accuracy of renal dosimetry imaging protocols in patients receiving Lutate therapy for neuroendocrine tumours (NETs), when data acquisition over multiple days is not possible on all cycles.MethodPatients who had received a full 4 cycles of Lutate therapy with complete imaging at each cycle were included. Imaging consisted of quantitative SPECT/CT of the kidneys at 4, 24 and 96–120 h post injection. Renal absorbed dose was calculated for each data set, and in addition, five alternative methods were explored for comparison. Method 1: a patient average clearance time (t1/2 average) derived from the first half of contributing patient data was used to estimate absorbed dose for subsequent patients based on 4 h imaging alone; method 2: t1/2 average was applied to subsequent patients on 24 h imaging alone; method 3: a patient-specific clearance rate (t1/2 patient) was determined from complete image data of cycle 1 and applied subsequently to remaining cycles using 4 h image data alone; method 4: t1/2 patient was applied to 24 h imaging alone in subsequent cycles; method 5: the 120 h data was estimated on subsequent cycles based on the cycle 1 fraction of injected activity (%IA) at 24 and 120 h.ResultsTwenty treatments from 18 patients, resulting in 80 cycles of therapy, were analysed. The measured average renal absorbed dose per cycle of treatment was 0.38 ± 0.19 Gy/GBq when derived from full imaging data. The use of t1/2 average applied to a single time point led to large deviations of dose estimates from true values (on average 59% and 30%, when using 4 h data and 24 h data, respectively). The use of complete image data on cycle 1 and the derivation of t1/2 patient led to improved dose estimates, with an average deviation from true values of 13% and 2% when using 4 h data only and 24 h data only, respectively. The use of a 120 h %IA derived from cycle 1 led to an average deviation from true dose estimates of 14%.ConclusionIn instances where demands on both patients and facilities make multiple time point data acquisition impractical, renal dosimetry is best derived through complete imaging at cycle 1 only followed by a single 24 h imaging time point on subsequent cycles, assuming no significant changes in renal function during the time course of therapy.

Highlights

  • This study aims to assess both feasibility and accuracy of renal dosimetry imaging protocols in patients receiving Lutate therapy for neuroendocrine tumours (NETs), when data acquisition over multiple days is not possible on all cycles

  • The use of t1/2 average applied to a single time point led to large deviations of dose estimates from true values

  • The peptide DOTA-(Tyr3)-octreotate labelled with the radionuclide Lutetium-177 (177Lu), commonly called ‘Lutate,’ is a somatostatin analogue used to selectively target and treat neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) that demonstrate an overexpression of somatostatin receptors. 177Lu has a 6.647 day physical half-life and emits β− particles (Emax = 0.50 MeV) and γs (113 keV [6%] and 208 keV [10%]) [1], which allow for imaging and subsequent dosimetry estimates

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This study aims to assess both feasibility and accuracy of renal dosimetry imaging protocols in patients receiving Lutate therapy for neuroendocrine tumours (NETs), when data acquisition over multiple days is not possible on all cycles. Whilst renal dosimetry is recommended for all patients receiving treatment, there are several limitations on ability and accuracy to achieve this end point. The ability to accurately derive quantitative images and acquire knowledge on injected radioactivity within the kidneys themselves is fraught with difficulty and performed with much variation between centres [4]. Aside from difficulties associated with the quantification process itself, one of the more challenging aspects of patient-specific Lutate renal dosimetry relates to the ability of both the clinical department and the patient to fulfil multiple time point image acquisitions, especially on later days, when considering that each complete treatment consists of several cycles of therapy. Aside from the constraints this places on staff and facilities in a busy nuclear medicine clinic, it is very demanding for patients, those who may not live locally and cannot return for scanning at late time points

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call