Home > Riviste > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging > Fascicoli precedenti > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2012 December;56(6) > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2012 December;56(6):529-37



Opzioni di pubblicazione
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca





The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2012 December;56(6):529-37


lingua: Inglese

Comparisons of dosimetric approaches for fractionated radioimmunotherapy of non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Ferrer L. 1, Malek E. 2, Bodet-Milin C. 3, Legouill S. 3, Prangère T. 2, Robu D. 2, Jeans S. 6, Tipping J. 6, Huglo D. 4, Carpentier P. 5, Illidge T. 6, Kraeber-Boderé F. 1, 3, Morschhauser F. 2, Bardiès M. 7

1 ICO René Gauducheau, St Herblain, France; 2 University Hospital Center, Lille, France; 3 University Hospital Center, Nantes, France; 4 University Lille Nord de France, Lille, France; 5 Oscar Lambret Center, Lille, France; 6 Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; 7 UMR 1037 Inserm/UPS, Toulouse, France


AIM: The aim of this study was to compare different dosimetric approaches on therapy naïve patients enrolled in a multicentre fractionated radioimmunotherapy trial, to determine which methodological approach correlates with bone marrow toxicity.
METHODS: Twenty-height non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients were treated with one or two fractions of 90Y-Ibritumomab-Tiuxetan (11.1 MBq/kg) 8 to 12 weeks apart in four different institutions. Quantitative imaging with 111In-Ibritumomab-Tiuxetan (185 MBq) was performed at 0, 1, 4 and 7 days after infusion, starting two weeks before the therapeutic administration. A whole-body (WB) CT scan was also acquired prior to the 111In-Ibritumomab injection, for attenuation correction purposes and was segmented to derive patient-specific organ masses. All dosimetry processing was centralized in a single institution. The first method (M_2D) was based on geometric mean WB scans, corrected for attenuation, scatter and organs superposition. The second method (M_2.5D) was based on the computed assisted matrix inversion approach and used segmented CT scans. The third method (M_3D) used iterative reconstruction of tomographic scans, corrected for attenuation, scatter and collimator response. Absorbed doses were estimated for lungs, liver, kidneys and spleen using MIRD S values adjusted for organ masses. Bone marrow (BM) absorbed doses were evaluated according to imaging methods (3) and compared to blood-based approaches.
RESULTS: For some patients, organ masses such as liver or spleen significantly differed from male/female reference masses, whereas lungs and kidneys masses were relatively constant. Except for lungs, absorbed doses estimated by M_2D were higher than those from M_2.5D and these, in turn, were higher that those calculated from M_3D (Wilcoxon P<8.6e-4). Median organ absorbed dose estimates were equivalent for both fractions except for the spleen. In fact, spleen absorbed doses for the second fraction were lower than those for the first fraction, regardless of the approach. Possible explanations are that patient spleen masses were kept constant for analysis of both fractions and/or that spleen uptake was lowered after the first fraction. Estimation of BM absorbed doses from blood sampling was unable to predict platelet toxicity, but image-based methods performed better. Additionally, for most organs, the absorbed dose delivered by the first fraction could predict that delivered by the second fraction.
CONCLUSION: These results confirm that different acquisition/processing protocols will lead to statistically different absorbed doses. Additionally, image-based dosimetric approaches are needed in order to correlate absorbed dose to bone marrow toxicity.

inizio pagina