1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Differences in predicted and actually absorbed doses in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.4747266
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/39/9/10.1118/1.4747266
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/39/9/10.1118/1.4747266

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Gamma camera image of patient 7 (anterior and posterior) 24 h after injection.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

The peptides are administered into the central compartment, distributed via blood flow and flow to interstitial spaces. Specific binding, internalization, and degradation take place in sst2 positive organs. The peptide is rapidly excreted via the kidneys. The model consists of two equal systems (labeled and unlabeled substance) which are connected by competition for the same receptors and by physical decay.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Investigated kidney models. Model A: unspecific uptake and release of intact peptide into the serum. Model B: unspecific uptake by kidney cells with subsequent degradation. Model C: no unspecific uptake, a fraction of peptide flows directly back to kidneys serum. Model D: no unspecific uptake, all peptide flows from the kidneys to bladder.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Models A–D were fitted to biodistribution data (111In-DTPAOC) of the liver, spleen, kidney, total body, tumor, and serum. The AICc was used to select the kidney model which was most supported by the data. Measured and simulated excretions (N = 3) of 90Y-DOTATATE were compared. The pretherapeutic and therapeutic AUCs of all organs were calculated. For the therapeutic AUC simulations based on the fitted parameters and the amounts of actually injected 90Y-DOTATATE were conducted. The influence of the amount of 90Y-DOTATATE was investigated.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

A: Fitted organ curves (model A2) of patient 3. B: Fitted tumor curves (model A2) of patients 6–10.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Residence times of organs normalized to organ mass for (a) tumor perfusion (2 l/min/l tumor volume) and 0.033 l tumor volume and (b) tumor perfusion (0.01 l/min/l tumor volume) and 1.3 l tumor volume.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Patient characteristics and treatment.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Model set and Akaike weights.

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Estimated parameters of organs.

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Estimated tumor parameters.

Generic image for table
TABLE V.

Residence times.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/39/9/10.1118/1.4747266
2012-08-30
2014-04-20
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Differences in predicted and actually absorbed doses in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/39/9/10.1118/1.4747266
10.1118/1.4747266
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM