Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDenis-Bacelar, AM
dc.contributor.authorChittenden, SJ
dc.contributor.authorMcCready, VR
dc.contributor.authorDivoli, A
dc.contributor.authorDearnaley, DP
dc.contributor.authorO'Sullivan, JM
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, B
dc.contributor.authorFlux, GD
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-01T13:48:24Z
dc.date.issued2018-04
dc.identifier.citationThe British journal of radiology, 2018, 91 (1084), pp. 20170795 - ?
dc.identifier.issn0007-1285
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.icr.ac.uk/handle/internal/1466
dc.identifier.eissn1748-880X
dc.identifier.doi10.1259/bjr.20170795
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to calculate the range of absorbed doses that could potentially be delivered by a variety of radiopharmaceuticals and typical fixed administered activities used for bone pain palliation in a cohort of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The methodology for the extrapolation of the biodistribution, pharmacokinetics and absorbed doses from a given to an alternative radiopharmaceutical is presented. METHODS:Sequential single photon emission CT images from 22 patients treated with 5 GBq of 186Re-HEDP were used to extrapolate the time-activity curves for various radiopharmaceuticals. Cumulated activity distributions for the delivered and extrapolated treatment plans were converted into absorbed dose distributions using the convolution dosimetry method. The lesion absorbed doses obtained for the different treatments were compared using the patient population distributions and cumulative dose-volume histograms. RESULTS:The median lesion absorbed doses across the patient cohort ranged from 2.7 Gy (range: 0.6-11.8 Gy) for 1100 MBq of 166Ho-DOTMP to 21.8 Gy (range: 4.5-117.6 Gy) for 150 MBq of 89Sr-dichloride. 32P-Na3PO4, 153Sm-EDTMP, 166Ho-DOTMP, 177Lu-EDTMP and 188Re-HEDP would have delivered 41, 32, 85, 20 and 64% lower absorbed doses, for the typical administered activities as compared to 186Re-HEDP, respectively, whilst 89Sr-dichloride would have delivered 25% higher absorbed doses. CONCLUSION:For the patient cohort studied, a wide range of absorbed doses would have been delivered for typical administration protocols in mCRPC. The methodology presented has potential use for emerging theragnostic agents. Advances in knowledge: The same patient cohort can receive a range of lesion absorbed doses from typical molecular radiotherapy treatments for patients with metastatic prostate cancer, highlighting the need to establish absorbed dose response relationships and to treat patients according to absorbed dose instead of using fixed administered activities.
dc.formatPrint-Electronic
dc.format.extent20170795 - ?
dc.languageeng
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectBone Neoplasms
dc.subjectProstatic Neoplasms
dc.subjectOrganometallic Compounds
dc.subjectEtidronic Acid
dc.subjectRadiopharmaceuticals
dc.subjectTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon
dc.subjectRadiotherapy Dosage
dc.subjectStem Cell Transplantation
dc.subjectRadiation Dosage
dc.subjectTissue Distribution
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectClinical Trials, Phase II as Topic
dc.titleBone lesion absorbed dose profiles in patients with metastatic prostate cancer treated with molecular radiotherapy.
dc.typeJournal Article
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1259/bjr.20170795
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-04
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
dc.relation.isPartOfThe British journal of radiology
pubs.issue1084
pubs.notesNot known
pubs.organisational-group/ICR
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Closed research teams
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Closed research teams/Clinical Academic Radiotherapy (Dearnaley)
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Radioisotope Physics
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Radioisotope Physics/Radioisotope Physics (hon.)
pubs.organisational-group/ICR
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Closed research teams
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Closed research teams/Clinical Academic Radiotherapy (Dearnaley)
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Radioisotope Physics
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Radioisotope Physics/Radioisotope Physics (hon.)
pubs.publication-statusPublished
pubs.volume91
pubs.embargo.termsNot known
icr.researchteamClinical Academic Radiotherapy (Dearnaley)en_US
icr.researchteamRadioisotope Physicsen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorDenis-Bacelar, Anaen
dc.contributor.icrauthorFlux, Glennen
dc.contributor.icrauthorDearnaley, Daviden


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0