Comparison of commercial dosimetric software platforms in patients treated with 177 Lu-DOTATATE for peptide receptor radionuclide therapy.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to quantitatively compare five commercial dosimetric software platforms based on the analysis of clinical datasets of patients who benefited from peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) with 177 Lu-DOTATATE (LUTATHERA® ). METHODS: The dosimetric analysis was performed on two patients during two cycles of PRRT with 177 Lu. Single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography images were acquired at 4, 24, 72, and 192 h post injection. Reconstructed images were generated using Dosimetry Toolkit® (DTK) from Xeleris™ and HybridRecon-Oncology version_1.3_Dicom (HROD) from HERMES. Reconstructed images using DTK were analyzed using the same software to calculate time-integrated activity coefficients (TIAC), and mean absorbed doses were estimated using OLINDA/EXM V1.0 with mass correction. Reconstructed images from HROD were uploaded into PLANET® OncoDose from DOSIsoft, STRATOS from Phillips, Hybrid Dosimetry Module™ from HERMES, and SurePlan™ MRT from MIM. Organ masses, TIACs, and mean absorbed doses were calculated from each application using their recommendations. RESULTS: The majority of organ mass estimates varied by <9.5% between all platforms. The highest variability for TIAC results between platforms was seen for the kidneys (28.2%) for the two patients and the two treatment cycles. Relative standard deviations in mean absorbed doses were slightly higher compared with those observed for TIAC, but remained of the same order of magnitude between all platforms. CONCLUSIONS: When applying a similar processing approach, results obtained were of the same order of magnitude regardless of the platforms used. However, the comparison of the performances of currently available platforms is still difficult as they do not all address the same parts of the dosimetric analysis workflow. In addition, the way in which data are handled in each part of the chain from data acquisition to absorbed doses may be different, which complicates the comparison exercise. Therefore, the dissemination of commercial solutions for absorbed dose calculation calls for the development of tools and standards allowing for the comparison of the performances between dosimetric software platforms.

Implementation of patient dosimetry in the clinical practice after targeted radiotherapy using [177Lu-[DOTA0, Tyr3]-octreotate.

BACKGROUND: This study's aim was to develop our dosimetric methodology using a commercial workstation for the routine evaluation of the organs at risk during peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) with 177Lu. METHODS: First, planar and SPECT sensitivity factors were determined on phantoms. The reconstruction parameters were optimized by SPECT/CT image acquisition using a NEMA IEC phantom containing a 500 ml bottle of 177Lu, to simulate a kidney. The recovery coefficients were determined on various phantoms. For the red marrow, this was calculated using a NEMA IEC phantom that contained a centrally placed bottle of 80 ml of 177Lu (to model the L2-L4 red marrow) flanked by two 200 ml bottles with 177Lu to simulate the kidneys. Then, SPECT/CT images were acquired at 4, 24, 72, and 192 h after injection in 12 patients with neuroendocrine tumors who underwent PRRT with 177Lu-DOTATATE. SPECT data were reconstructed using the iterative ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) method, with six iterations and ten subsets, attenuation, scatter, recovery resolution corrections, and a Gaussian post-filter of 0.11 cm. The liver, spleen, kidneys, and red marrow dose per administered activity (AD/A admin) values were calculated with the Medical Internal Radiation Dose (MIRD) formalism and the residence times (Dosimetry toolkit® application) using standard and CT imaging-based organ masses (OLINDA/EXM® V1.0 software). RESULTS: Sensitivity factors of 6.11 ± 0.01 and 5.67 ± 0.08 counts/s/MBq were obtained with planar and SPECT/CT acquisitions, respectively. A recovery coefficient of 0.78 was obtained for the modeled L2-L4 red marrow. The mean AD/A admin values were 0.43 ± 0.13 mGy/MBq [0.27-0.91] for kidneys, 0.54 ± 0.58 mGy/MBq [0.12-2.26] for liver, 0.61 ± 0.13 mGy/MBq [0.42-0.89] for spleen, and 0.04 ± 0.02 mGy/MBq [0.01-0.09] for red marrow. The AD/A admin values varied when calculated using the personalized and standard organ mass, particularly for kidneys (p = 1 × 10-7), spleen (p = 0.0069), and red marrow (p = 0.0027). Intra-patient differences were observed especially in organs close to or including tumor cells or metastases. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained AD/A admin values were in agreement with the literature data. This study shows the technical feasibility of patient dosimetry in clinical practice and the need to obtain patient-specific information.