Technical note: Impact of dose voxel kernel (DVK) values on dosimetry estimates in

177Lu 90Y dose-voxel-kernel patient-specific dosimetry radionuclide therapy

Journal

Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
15 Sep 2023
Historique:
revised: 23 04 2023
received: 10 12 2022
accepted: 05 08 2023
medline: 15 9 2023
pubmed: 15 9 2023
entrez: 15 9 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) is an increasingly adopted modality for treating cancer. There is evidence that the optimization of the treatment based on dosimetry can improve outcomes. However, standardization of the clinical dosimetry workflow still represents a major effort. Among the many sources of variability, the impact of using different Dose Voxel Kernels (DVKs) to generate absorbed dose (AD) maps by convolution with the time-integrated activity (TIA) distribution has not been systematically investigated. This study aims to compare DVKs and assess the differences in the ADs when convolving the same TIA map with different DVKs. DVKs of 3 × 3 × 3 mm The CoV (% maximum difference) in voxels of normalized coordinates [0,0,0], [0,1,0], and [0,1,1] were 5%(21%), 9%(35%), and 10%(46%) for the This study showed a considerable AD variability due exclusively to the use of different DVKs. A concerted effort by the scientific community would contribute to decrease these discrepancies, strengthening the consistency of AD calculation in RPT.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) is an increasingly adopted modality for treating cancer. There is evidence that the optimization of the treatment based on dosimetry can improve outcomes. However, standardization of the clinical dosimetry workflow still represents a major effort. Among the many sources of variability, the impact of using different Dose Voxel Kernels (DVKs) to generate absorbed dose (AD) maps by convolution with the time-integrated activity (TIA) distribution has not been systematically investigated.
PURPOSE OBJECTIVE
This study aims to compare DVKs and assess the differences in the ADs when convolving the same TIA map with different DVKs.
METHODS METHODS
DVKs of 3 × 3 × 3 mm
RESULTS RESULTS
The CoV (% maximum difference) in voxels of normalized coordinates [0,0,0], [0,1,0], and [0,1,1] were 5%(21%), 9%(35%), and 10%(46%) for the
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This study showed a considerable AD variability due exclusively to the use of different DVKs. A concerted effort by the scientific community would contribute to decrease these discrepancies, strengthening the consistency of AD calculation in RPT.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37712869
doi: 10.1002/mp.16729
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : National Institute of Health, USA
ID : R01CA240706
Organisme : National Institute of Health, USA
ID : R01EB022075

Informations de copyright

© 2023 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Références

Sgouros G, Hobbs RF. Dosimetry for radiopharmaceutical therapy. Semin Nucl Med. 2014;44(3):172-178. doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2014.03.007
Bardies M, Vergara Gil A. ABSORBED DOSE CALCULATION. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Dosimetry for Radiopharmaceutical Therapy [IAEA Preprint]; 2022:154-175. http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:53037189
Della Gala G, Bardiès M, Tipping J, Strigari L. Overview of commercial treatment planning systems for targeted radionuclide therapy. Phys Med. 2021;92:52-61. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.11.001
Auditore L, Pistone D, Amato E, Italiano A. Monte Carlo methods in nuclear medicine. In: Signore A, ed. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. Elsevier; 2022:587-606. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-822960-6.00136-8
Pacilio M, Lanconelli N, Lo MS, et al. Differences among Monte Carlo codes in the calculations of voxel S values for radionuclide targeted therapy and analysis of their impact on absorbed dose evaluations. Med Phys. 2009;36(5):1543-1552. doi:10.1118/1.3103401
Lanconelli N, Pacilio M, Lo MeoS, et al. A free database of radionuclide voxel S values for the dosimetry of nonuniform activity distributions. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57(2):517-533. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/57/2/517
Pistone D, Auditore L, Italiano A, Baldari S, Amato E. An analytic model to calculate Voxel S-Values for 177Lu. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2022;8:065030. doi:10.1088/2057-1976/ac997e
Graves S, Tiwari A, Merrick M, et al. Accurate resampling of radial dose point kernels to a Cartesian matrix for voxelwise dose calculation. Published online 2020. doi:10.5281/ZENODO.3827983 (Version 1.1 at https://zenodo.org/record/7596345#.ZD1DPnbP2KJ)
Vergara Gil A. OpenDoseDVKData. Accessed 2022 https://gitlab.com/opendose/opendosedvkdata
Amato E, Minutoli F, Pacilio M, Campennì A, Baldari S. An analytical method for computing voxel S values for electrons and photons. Med Phys. 2012;39:6808-6817. doi:10.1118/1.4757912
Bolch WE, Bouchet LG, Robertson JS, et al. MIRD pamphlet no. 17: the dosimetry of nonuniform activity distributions-Radionuclide S values at the voxel level. J Nucl Med. 1999;40(1).
Dewaraja YK, Van BJ. Lu-177 DOTATATE Anonymized Patient Datasets: Multi-Time Point Lu-177 SPECT/CT Scans. Univ Michigan-Deep Blue Data. doi:10.7302/0n8e-rz46. Published online 2021.
Van BJ, Dewaraja YK. Y-90 PET/CT & SPECT/CT and corresponding contours dataset 31JULY2020. Univ Michigan-Deep Blue Data. doi:10.7302/pf4m-vn04. Published online 2020.
Uribe C, Peterson A, Van B, et al. An international study of factors affecting variability of dosimetry calculations, Part 1: design and early results of the SNMMI Dosimetry Challenge. J Nucl Med. 2021;62(3):36S-47S. doi:10.2967/jnumed.121.262748. Supplement.
Uribe C, Brosch-Lenz J, Peterson A, et al. Variability in dosimetry calculations: an analysis of the results submitted to the SNMMI Lu-177 dosimetry challenge. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(2):2351. supplement.
Dewaraja YK, Van BJ. Lu-177 DOTATATE anonymized patient datasets: lesion and organ volumes of interest. Univ Michigan-Deep Blue Data. doi:10.7302/vhrh-qg23. Published online 2021.
RAdiation Dose Assessment Resource (RADAR)-The Decay Data. Accessed 2022. http://www.doseinfo-radar.com/RADARDecay.html
National Nuclear Data Center. Accessed 2018. http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/index.jsp
NUCLEIDE. Accessed 2022. http://www.nucleide.org/DDEP_WG/DDEPdata.htm
García-Toraño E, Peyres V, Bé MM, Dulieu C, Lépy MC, Salvat F. Simulation of decay processes and radiation transport times in radioactivity measurements. Nucl Instruments Methods Phys Res Sect B Beam Interact with Mater Atoms. 2017;396:43-49. doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2017.02.002
Agency NE. PENELOPE 2018: A Code System for Monte Carlo Simulation of Electron and Photon Transport. 2019. doi:10.1787/32da5043-en
Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File. Accessed 2022. https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/ensdf/
National Nuclear Data Center NuDat (Nuclear Structure and Decay Data). NuDat 3.
Mougeot X. Reliability of usual assumptions in the calculation of β and ν spectra. Phys Rev C. 2015;91(5):55504. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.91.055504
Van B, Dewaraja YK, Niedbala JT, et al. Experimental validation of Monte Carlo dosimetry for therapeutic beta emitters with radiochromic film in a 3D-printed phantom. Med Phys. doi:10.1002/mp.15926. Published online 2022.
Cross WG. Variation of beta dose attenuation in different media. Phys Med Biol. 1968;13(4):611-618. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/13/4/310
Eckerman KF, Westfall RJ, Ryman JC, Cristy M. Availability of nuclear decay data in electronic form, including beta spectra not previously published. Health Phys. 1994;67(4):338-345. doi:10.1097/00004032-199410000-00004
Eckerman KF, Westfall RJ, Ryman JC, Cristy M. Nuclear Decay Data Files of the Dosimetry Research Group. United States; 1993. http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:25039816
Garin E, Tselikas L, Guiu B, et al. Personalised versus standard dosimetry approach of selective internal radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (DOSISPHERE-01): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;1253(20):1-13. doi:10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30290-9
Taprogge J, Wadsley J, Miles E, Flux GD. Recommendations for multicentre clinical trials involving dosimetry for molecular radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2021;33(2):131-136. doi:10.1016/j.clon.2020.12.002
Mora-Ramirez E, Santoro L, Cassol E, et al. Comparison of commercial dosimetric software platforms in patients treated with 177Lu-DOTATATE for peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. Med Phys. 2020;47(9):4602-4615. doi:10.1002/mp.14375

Auteurs

Rachele Danieli (R)

Department of Medical Physics, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles (H.U.B), Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium.
Université Libre De Bruxelles (ULB), Radiophysics and MRI Physics Laboratory, Brussels, Belgium.
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB)Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles (H.U.B), Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium.

Daniele Pistone (D)

Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and of Morphologic and Functional Imaging (BIOMORF), University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
National Institute for Nuclear Physics (INFN), section of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Caserta, Italy.

Jonathan Tranel (J)

Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.

Francesca Botta (F)

Medical Physics Unit, Instituto Europeo di Oncologia IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Carlos Uribe-Munoz (C)

Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Functional Imaging, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Davide Raspanti (D)

Temasinergie S.p.A., Via Marcello Malpighi 120, Faenza, Italy.

Francesc Salvat (F)

Facultat de Física (FQA and ICC), Universitat de Barcelona, Diagonal 645, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.

Scott J Wilderman (SJ)

Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Manuel Bardiès (M)

Département de Médecine Nucléaire, Institut Régional du Cancer de Montpellier (ICM), Montpellier, France.
IRCM, UMR 1194 INSERM, Université de Montpellier and Institut Régional du Cancer de Montpellier (ICM), Montpellier, France.

Ernesto Amato (E)

Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and of Morphologic and Functional Imaging (BIOMORF), University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
National Institute for Nuclear Physics (INFN), section of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Health Physics Unit, University Hospital "Gaetano Martino,", Messina, Italy.

Yuni K Dewaraja (YK)

Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Marta Cremonesi (M)

Radiation Research Unit, Instituto Europeo di Oncologia IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti 435, Milano, Italy.

Classifications MeSH