Patient-specific organ and effective dose estimates in pediatric oncology computed tomography.

PURPOSE: Estimate organ and effective doses from computed tomography scans of pediatric oncologic patients using patient-specific information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With IRB approval patient-specific scan parameters and patient size obtained from DICOM images and vendor-provided dose monitoring application were obtained for a cross-sectional study of 1250 pediatric patients from 0 through 20 y-olds who underwent head, chest, abdomen-pelvis, or chest-abdomen-pelvis CT scans. Patients were categorized by age. Organ doses and effective doses were estimated using VirtualDose™ CT based on patient-specific information, tube current modulation (TCM), and age-specific realistic phantoms. CTDIvol, DLP, and dose results were compared with those reported in the literature. RESULTS: CTDIvol and DLP varied widely as patient size varied. The 75th percentiles of CTDIvol and DLP were no greater than in the literature with the exception of head scans of 16-20 y-olds and of abdomen-pelvis scans of larger patients. Eye lens dose from a head scan was up to 69 mGy. Mean organ doses agreed with other studies at maximal difference of 38% for chest and 41% for abdomen-pelvis scans. Mean effective dose was generally higher for older patients. The highest effective doses were estimated for the 16-20 y-olds as: head 3.3 mSv, chest 4.1 mSv, abdomen-pelvis 10.0 mSv, chest-abdomen-pelvis 14.0 mSv. CONCLUSION: Patient-specific organ and effective doses have been estimated for pediatric oncologic patients from <1 through 20 y-olds. The effect of TCM was successfully accounted for in the estimates. Output parameters varied with patient size. CTDIvol and DLP results are useful for future protocol optimization.

Radiological protection for pregnant women at a large academic medical Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: Most radiation protection programs, regulations and guidance apply specific restrictions to the occupational exposure of pregnant workers. The aim of this study was to compile data from the declared pregnant woman (DPW) radiation protection program over more than 5years at a large, high-volume, comprehensive oncology academic/medical institution and to evaluate for effectiveness against existing regulations and guidance. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of the data collected as part of the DPW radiation protection program from January 2010 through May 2016, including the number of declared pregnancies, worker category, personal and fetal dosimetry monitoring measurements, workplace modifications, as well as the monthly and total recorded badge results during the entire pregnancy. RESULTS: 245 pregnancies were declared. The mean monthly fetal radiation dosimetry result was 0.009mSv with a median of 0.005mSv and a maximum of 0.39mSv. The mean total dose over the entire pregnancy was estimated to be 0.08mSv with a median of 0.05mSv and a maximum of 0.89mSv. Only 8 (3.2%) of the 245 declared pregnancies required that workplace modifications be implemented for the worker. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a declared pregnancy and fetal assessment program, careful planning, an understanding of the risks, and minimization of radiation dose by employing appropriate radiation safety measures as needed, can allow medical staff to perform procedures and normal activities without incurring significant risks to the conceptus, or significant interruptions of job activities for most medical workers.

A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods.

BACKGROUND: Computed Tomography (CT) contributes up to 50% of the medical exposure to the United States population. Children are considered to be at higher risk of developing radiation-induced tumors due to the young age of exposure and increased tissue radiosensitivity. Organ dose estimation is essential for pediatric and adult patient cancer risk assessment. The objective of this study is to validate the VirtualDose software in comparison to currently available software and methods for pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation. METHODS: Five age groups of pediatric patients and adult patients were simulated by three organ dose estimators. Head, chest, abdomen-pelvis, and chest-abdomen-pelvis CT scans were simulated, and doses to organs both inside and outside the scan range were compared. For adults, VirtualDose was compared against ImPACT and CT-Expo. For pediatric patients, VirtualDose was compared to CT-Expo and compared to size-based methods from literature. Pediatric to adult effective dose ratios were also calculated with VirtualDose, and were compared with the ranges of effective dose ratios provided in ImPACT. RESULTS: In-field organs see less than 60% difference in dose between dose estimators. For organs outside scan range or distributed organs, a five times' difference can occur. VirtualDose agrees with the size-based methods within 20% difference for the organs investigated. Between VirtualDose and ImPACT, the pediatric to adult ratios for effective dose are compared, and less than 21% difference is observed for chest scan while more than 40% difference is observed for head-neck scan and abdomen-pelvis scan. For pediatric patients, 2 cm scan range change can lead to a five times dose difference in partially scanned organs. CONCLUSIONS: VirtualDose is validated against CT-Expo and ImPACT with relatively small discrepancies in dose for organs inside scan range, while large discrepancies in dose are observed for organs outside scan range. Patient-specific organ dose estimation is possible using the size-based methods, and VirtualDose agrees with size-based method for the organs investigated. Careful range selection for CT protocols is necessary for organ dose optimization for pediatric and adult patients.

Results of a 10-year survey of workload for 10 treatment vaults at a high-throughput comprehensive cancer center.

The workload for shielding purposes of modern linear accelerators (linacs) consists of primary and scatter radiation which depends on the dose delivered to isocenter (cGy) and leakage radiation which depends on the monitor units (MUs). In this study, we report on the workload for 10 treatment vaults in terms of dose to isocenter (cGy), monitor units delivered (MUs), number of treatment sessions (Txs), as well as, use factors (U) and modulation factors (CI) for different treatment techniques. The survey was performed for the years between 2006 and 2015 and included 16 treatment machines which represent different generations of Varian linear accelerators (6EX, 600C, 2100C, 2100EX, and TrueBeam) operating at different electron and x-ray energies (6, 9, 12, 16 and 20 MeV electrons and, 6 and 15 MV x-rays). An institutional review board (IRB) approval was acquired to perform this study. Data regarding patient workload, dose to isocenter, number of monitor units delivered, beam energies, gantry angles, and treatment techniques were exported from an ARIA treatment management system (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, Ca.) into Excel spreadsheets and data analysis was performed in Matlab. The average (± std-dev) number of treatment sessions, dose to isocenter, and number of monitor units delivered per week per machine in 2006 was 119 ± 39 Txs, (300 ± 116) × 102 cGys, and (78 ± 28) × 103 MUs respectively. In contrast, the workload in 2015 was 112 ± 40 Txs, (337 ± 124) × 102 cGys, and (111 ± 46) × 103 MUs. 60% of the workload (cGy) was delivered using 6 MV and 30% using 15 MV while the remaining 10% was delivered using electron beams. The modulation factors (MU/cGy) for IMRT and VMAT were 5.0 (± 3.4) and 4.6 (± 1.6) respectively. Use factors using 90° gantry angle intervals were equally distributed (~0.25) but varied considerably among different treatment techniques. The workload, in terms of dose to isocenter (cGy) and subsequently monitor units (MUs), has been steadily increasing over the past decade. This increase can be attributed to increased use of high dose hypo-fractionated regimens (SBRT, SRS) and the increase in use of IMRT and VMAT, which require higher MUs per cGy as compared to more conventional treatment (3DCRT). Meanwhile, the patient workload in terms of treatment sessions per week remained relatively constant. The findings of this report show that variables used for shielding purposes still fall within the recommendation of NCRP Report 151.

Radiation Dosimetry of Whole-Body Dual-Tracer 18F-FDG and 11C-Acetate PET/CT for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

UNLABELLED: Combined whole-body dual-tracer ((18)F-FDG and (11)C-acetate) PET/CT is increasingly used for staging hepatocellular carcinoma, with only limited studies investigating the radiation dosimetry data of these scans. The aim of the study was to characterize the radiation dosimetry of combined whole-body dual-tracer PET/CT protocols. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent whole-body dual-tracer PET/CT scans were retrospectively reviewed with institutional review board approval. OLINDA/EXM 1.1 was used to estimate patient-specific internal dose exposure in each organ. Biokinetic models for (18)F-FDG and (11)C-acetate as provided by ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) publication 106 were used. Standard reference phantoms were modified to more closely represent patient-specific organ mass. With patient-specific parameters, organ equivalent doses from each CT series were estimated using VirtualDose. Dosimetry capabilities for tube current modulation protocols were applied by integrating with the latest anatomic realistic models. Effective dose was calculated using ICRP publication 103 tissue-weighting coefficients for adult male and female, respectively. RESULTS: Fourteen scans were evaluated (12 men, 2 women; mean age ± SD, 60 ± 19.48 y). The patient-specific effective dose from (18)F-FDG and (11)C-acetate was 6.08 ± 1.49 and 1.56 ± 0.47 mSv, respectively, for male patients and 6.62 ± 1.38 and 1.79 ± 0.12 mSV, respectively, for female patients. The patient-specific effective dose of the CT component, which comprised 2 noncontrast whole-body scans, to male and female patients was 21.20 ± 8.94 and 14.79 ± 3.35 mSv, respectively. Thus, the total effective doses of the combined whole-body dual-tracer PET/CT studies for male and female patients were 28.84 ± 10.18 and 23.19 ± 4.61 mSv, respectively. CONCLUSION: Patient-specific parameters allow for more accurate estimation of organ equivalent doses. Considering the substantial radiation dose incurred, judicious medical justification is required with every whole-body dual-tracer PET/CT referral. Although radiation risks may have less impact for the population with cancer because of their reduced life expectancy, the information is of interest and relevant for both justification, to evaluate risk/benefit, and protocol optimization.

Radiation safety considerations for the use of ²²³RaCl2 DE in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer.

The majority of patients with late stage castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) develop bone metastases that often result in significant bone pain. Therapeutic palliation strategies can delay or prevent skeletal complications and may prolong survival. An alpha-particle based therapy, radium-223 dichloride (²²³RaCl2), has been developed that delivers highly localized effects in target areas and likely reduces toxicity to adjacent healthy tissue, particularly bone marrow. Radiation safety aspects were evaluated for a single comprehensive cancer center clinical phase 1, open-label, single ascending-dose study for three cohorts at 50, 100, or 200 kBq kg⁻¹ body weight. Ten patients received administrations, and six patients completed the study with 1 y follow-up. Dose rates from patients administered ²²³Ra dichloride were typically less than 2 µSv h⁻¹ MBq⁻¹ on contact and averaged 0.02 µSv h⁻¹ MBq⁻¹ at 1 m immediately following administration. Removal was primarily by fecal excretion, and whole body effective half-lives were highly dependent upon fecal compartment transfer, ranging from 2.5-11.4 d. Radium-223 is safe and straightforward to administer using conventional nuclear medicine equipment. For this clinical study, few radiation protection limitations were recommended post-therapy based on facility evaluations. Specific precautions are dependent on local regulatory authority guidance. Subsequent studies have demonstrated significantly improved overall survival and very low toxicity, suggesting that ²²³Ra may provide a new standard of care for patients with CRPC and bone metastases.

Radioactive seed localization with 125I for nonpalpable lesions prior to breast lumpectomy and/or excisional biopsy: methodology, safety, and experience of initial year.

The use of radioactive seed localization (RSL) as an alternative to wire localizations (WL) for nonpalpable breast lesions is rapidly gaining acceptance because of its advantages for both the patient and the surgical staff. This paper examines the initial experience with over 1,200 patients seen at a comprehensive cancer center. Radiation safety procedures for radiology, surgery, and pathology were implemented, and radioactive material inventory control was maintained using an intranet-based program. Surgical probes allowed for discrimination between 125I seed photon energies from 99mTc administered for sentinel node testing. A total of 1,127 patients (median age of 57.2 y) underwent RSL procedures with 1,223 seeds implanted. Implanted seed depth ranged from 10.3-107.8 mm. The median length of time from RSL implant to surgical excision was 2 d. The median 125I activity at time of implant was 3.1 MBq (1.9 to 4.6). The median dose rate from patients with a single seed was 9.5 µSv h-1 and 0.5 µSv h-1 at contact and 1 m, respectively. The maximum contact dose rate was 187 µSv h-1 from a superficially placed seed. RSL performed greater than 1 d before surgery is a viable alternative to WL, allowing flexibility in scheduling, minimizing day of surgery procedures, and improving workflow in breast imaging and surgery. RSL has been shown to be a safe and effective procedure for preoperative localization under mammographic and ultrasound guidance, which can be managed with the use of customized radiation protection controls.

Radioactive seed localization compared to wire localization in breast-conserving surgery: initial 6-month experience.

BACKGROUND: Wire localization (WL) of nonpalpable breast cancers on the day of surgery is uncomfortable for patients and impacts operating room efficiency. Radioactive seed localization (RSL) before the day of surgery avoids these disadvantages. In this study we compare outcomes of our initial 6-month experience with RSL to those with WL in the preceding 6 months. METHODS: Lumpectomies for invasive or intraductal cancers localized with a single (125)iodine seed (January-June 2012) were compared with those using 1 wire (July-December 2011). Surgeons and radiologists did not change. Positive and close margins were defined as tumor on ink and tumor ≤1 mm from ink, respectively. Demographic and clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared between RSL and WL patients. RESULTS: There were 431 RSL and 256 WL lumpectomies performed. Clinicopathologic characteristics did not differ between groups. Most seeds (90 %) were placed before the day of surgery. Positive margins were present in 7.7 % of RSL versus 5.5 % of WL patients, and 16.9 % of RSL versus 19.9 % of WL had close margins (p = 0.38). The median operative time was longer for lumpectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in the RSL group (55 vs. 48 min, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the volume of tissue excised between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the first 6 months of RSL, operative scheduling was simplified, while rates of positive and close margins were similar to those seen after many years of experience with WL. Operative time was slightly longer for RSL lumpectomy and SLNB; we anticipate this will decrease with experience.

Safety and efficacy of radioactive seed localization with I-125 prior to lumpectomy and/or excisional biopsy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of pre-operative I-125 radioactive seed localization (RSL) as an alternative to wire localization (WL). METHODS: A waiver was granted by the institutional review board for this HIPAA compliant study. Review of 356 consecutive single site nonpalpable mammographic and ultrasound guided I-125 RSLs done between November 2011 and April 2012 was conducted. Preoperative mammograms and specimen radiographs were reviewed for seed-target distance, lesion location, and target/seed removal. During a brief surgical training period, 35 of 356 women had both RSL and wire localization (WL) of the same lesion. Chi-square and single sample t-tests were used to compare margin status and duration of procedures. RESULTS: Of the 356 RSLs, 303 (85.1%) were performed ≥ 1 day before surgery. Mammographic guidance was used in 330 (93%) and ultrasound in 26 (7%). Mean seed to target distance was 1mm (range 0-20mm); all targeted lesions were retrieved. In 31 women in whom mammographic guidance was used for both RSL and WL, median procedure time was not significantly different (RSL 9.0 min; WL 7.0 min; p=0.91), and median seed migration distance was <1mm (range 0-15 mm). No difference was detected between margin status with RSL alone versus WL (p=0.40 and p=0.65 for positive and <1mm margins, respectively). Two adverse events occurred requiring an additional wire/surgery. CONCLUSION: RSL ≥ 1 day before surgery is a safe effective procedure for pre-operative localization, with few adverse events and surgical outcomes comparable to those achieved with wire localization.

Measured dose rate constant from oncology patients administered 18F for positron emission tomography.

PURPOSE: Patient exposure rate measurements verify published patient dose rate data and characterize dose rates near 2-18-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) patients. A specific dose rate constant based on patient exposure rate measurements is a convenient quantity that can be applied to the desired distance, injection activity, and time postinjection to obtain an accurate calculation of cumulative external radiation dose. This study reports exposure rates measured at various locations near positron emission tomography (PET) (18)F-FDG patients prior to PET scanning. These measurements are normalized for the amount of administered activity, measurement distance, and time postinjection and are compared with other published data. METHODS: Exposure rates were measured using a calibrated ionization chamber at various body locations from 152 adult oncology patients postvoid after a mean uptake time of 76 min following injection with a mean activity of 490 MBq (18)F-FDG. Data were obtained at nine measurement locations for each patient: three near the head, four near the chest, and two near the feet. RESULTS: On contact with, 30 cm superior to and 30 cm lateral to the head, the mean (75th percentile) dose rates per unit injected activity at 60 min postinjection were 0.482 (0.511), 0.135 (0.155), and 0.193 (0.223) µSv∕MBq h, respectively. On contact with, 30 cm anterior to, 30 cm lateral to and 1 m anterior to the chest, the mean (75th percentile) dose rates per unit injected activity at 60 min postinjection were 0.623 (0.709), 0.254 (0.283), 0.190 (0.218), and 0.067 (0.081) µSv∕MBq h respectively. 30 cm inferior and 30 cm lateral to the feet, the mean (75th percentile) dose rates per unit injected activity at 60 min postinjection were 0.024 (0.022) and 0.039 (0.044) µSv∕MBq h, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The measurements for this study support the use of 0.092 µSv m(2)∕MBq h as a reasonable representation of the dose rate anterior from the chest of patients immediately following injection. This value can then be reliably scaled to the desired time and distance for planning and staff dose evaluation purposes. At distances closer than 1 m, a distance-specific dose rate constant of 0.367 µSv∕MBq h at 30 cm is recommended for accurate calculations. An accurate patient-specific dose rate constant that accounts for patient-specific variables (e.g., distribution and attenuation) will allow an accurate evaluation of the dose rate from a patient injected with an isotope rather than simply utilizing a physical constant.

Incidence of secondary cancer development after high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy and image-guided brachytherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To report the incidence and excess risk of second malignancy (SM) development compared with the general population after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy to treat prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1998 and 2001, 1,310 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with EBRT (n = 897) or brachytherapy (n = 413). We compared the incidence of SMs in our patients with that of the general population extracted from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data set combined with the 2000 census data. RESULTS: The 10-year likelihood of SM development was 25% after EBRT and 15% after brachytherapy (p = .02). The corresponding 10-year likelihood for in-field SM development in these groups was 4.9% and 1.6% (p = .24). Multivariate analysis showed that EBRT vs. brachytherapy and older age were the only significant predictors for the development of all SMs (p = .037 and p = .030), with a trend for older patients to develop a SM. The increased incidence of SM for EBRT patients was explained by the greater incidence of skin cancer outside the radiation field compared with that after brachytherapy (10.6% and 3.3%, respectively, p = .004). For the EBRT group, the 5- and 10-year mortality rate was 1.96% and 5.1% from out-of field cancer, respectively; for in-field SM, the corresponding mortality rates were 0.1% and 0.7%. Among the brachytherapy group, the 5- and 10-year mortality rate related to out-of field SM was 0.8% and 2.7%, respectively. Our observed SM rates after prostate RT were not significantly different from the cancer incidence rates in the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Using modern sophisticated treatment techniques, we report low rates of in-field bladder and rectal SM risks after prostate cancer RT. Furthermore, the likelihood of mortality secondary to a SM was unusual. The greater rate of SM observed with EBRT vs. brachytherapy was related to a small, but significantly increased, number of skin cancers in the EBRT patients compared with that of the general population.

Organ and effective dose estimates for patients undergoing hepatic arterial embolization for treatment of liver malignancy.

PURPOSE: Effective dose (E) is useful as a dose index for patient exposures in interventional radiology; therefore, the authors estimated E from the kerma-area product (P(KA)) utilized during hepatic embolization interventional radiology cases performed at a cancer center and determined the variation of such doses over a representative patient population. METHODS: A single-center, IRB-approved retrospective study was performed to estimate doses from consecutive hepatic embolization procedures performed during 2006. Organ doses E and E/P(KA) were determined from patient height, weight, P(KA), procedure geometry factors, beam quality, the PCXMC Monte Carlo model, and the International Commission on Radiological Protection organ weighting factors. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen patients were included in the study population, 72 males and 41 females, with a median age of 63 yr (29-89 yr), weight of 79 kg (42-111 kg), height of 170 cm (147-188 cm), and P(KA) of 233 Gy cm2 (9-1020 Gy cm2). E was directly correlated with P(KA) r2 = 0.8 (p < 0.01), with a median E/P(KA) of 0.18 mSv Gy(-1) cm(-2) (0.12-0.33 mSv Gy(-1) cm(-2)). The E/P(KA) ratio was inversely and exponentially correlated with weight r2 = 0.9 (p < 0.001). The median E (mSv) for the study patient population was 44 mSv (2.0-255 mSv). CONCLUSIONS: Values of E can be estimated utilizing patient-specific and procedure-specific parameters. The strong inverse correlation of E/P(KA) with patient weight allows simple estimation of E from P(KA) and patient weight. There is a wide variation in effective dose in oncologic hepatic embolizations with doses up to an order of magnitude higher than diagnostic imaging of the abdomen by CT radiology. Variation is likely due to patient geometry, clinical technique factors, and procedure complexity.

Fears, feelings, and facts: interactively communicating benefits and risks of medical radiation with patients.

OBJECTIVE: As public awareness of medical radiation exposure increases, there has been heightened awareness among patients and physicians of the importance of holistic benefit-and-risk discussions in shared medical decision making. CONCLUSION: We examine the rationale for informed consent and risk communication, draw on the literature on the psychology of radiation risk communication to increase understanding, examine methods commonly used to communicate radiation risk, and suggest strategies for improving communication about medical radiation benefits and risk.

Unprotected operator eye lens doses in oncologic interventional radiology are clinically significant: estimation from patient kerma-area-product data.

PURPOSE: To correlate operator lens dose to patient-delivered kerma-area-product (P(KA)) to evaluate the usefulness of P(KA) as a surrogate for operator eye dose if collar monitor readings are unavailable or deemed unreliable, and to evaluate if unprotected lens dose is clinically significant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of peak skin doses for consecutive interventional radiology procedures performed during 2006 that had P(KA) estimates recorded was performed. Unshielded operator lens dose equivalents (LDE) were obtained from dosimetry monitors worn outside the collar shield of operating interventional radiologists. Operator LDE were correlated with patient P(KA). RESULTS: Average LDE for 2006 was 35.7 mSv ± 32.7 (range 5.2-89.9 mSv). Patient-delivered P(KA) correlated directly with LDE, where 1 Gy cm(2) to the patient resulted in an average of 4.2 µSv to the unprotected eyes of the primary operator (r(2) = 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: P(KA) may be useful as a surrogate measure of operator LDE if collar monitor readings are unavailable or deemed unreliable. For this study, the dose-effect threshold for cataract formation could be surpassed for some physicians within 11 years if lens dose-mitigating strategies are not routinely employed.

Comparing strategies for operator eye protection in the interventional radiology suite.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of common radiation-shielding strategies, used alone and in combination, on scattered dose to the fluoroscopy operator's eye. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With an operator phantom positioned at the groin, upper abdomen, and neck, posteroanterior low-dose fluoroscopy was performed at the phantom patient's upper abdomen. Operator lens radiation dose rate was recorded with a solid-state dosimeter with and without a leaded table skirt, nonleaded and leaded (0.75 mm lead equivalent) eyeglasses, disposable tungsten-antimony drapes (0.25 mm lead equivalent), and suspended and rolling (0.5 mm lead equivalent) transparent leaded shields. Lens dose measurements were also obtained in right and left 15° anterior obliquities with the operator at the upper abdomen and during digital subtraction angiography (two images per second) with the operator at the patient's groin. Each strategy's shielding efficacy was expressed as a reduction factor of the lens dose rate compared with the unshielded condition. RESULTS: Use of leaded glasses alone reduced the lens dose rate by a factor of five to 10; scatter-shielding drapes alone reduced the dose rate by a factor of five to 25. Use of both implements together was always more protective than either used alone, reducing dose rate by a factor of 25 or more. Lens dose was routinely undetectable when a suspended shield was the only barrier during low-dose fluoroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Use of scatter-shielding drapes or leaded glasses decreases operator lens dose by a factor of five to 25, but the use of both barriers together (or use of leaded shields) provides maximal protection to the interventional radiologist's eye.

Less-restrictive, patient-specific radiation safety precautions can be safely prescribed after permanent seed implantation.

PURPOSE: To use radiation exposure rate measurements to determine patient-specific radiation safety instructions with the aim of reducing unnecessary precaution times and to evaluate potential doses to members of the public. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Radiation exposure rate measurements were obtained from 1279 patients with Stage T1-2 prostate cancer who underwent transperineal (125)I or (103)Pd seed implantation from January 1995 through July 2008. An algorithm was developed from these measurements to determine the required precaution times to maintain public effective doses below 50% of the limits for specific exposure situations. RESULTS: The median air kerma rates at 30 cm from the anterior skin surface were 4.9 microGy/h (range: 0.1-31.5) for (125)I and 1.5 microGy/h (range: 0.02-14.9) for (103)Pd. The derived algorithms depended primarily on the half-life T(p), the measured exposure rate at 30 cm, and specific exposure situation factors. For the typical (103)Pd patient, no radiation safety precautions are required. For the typical (125)I patient, no precautions are required for coworkers, nonpregnant adults who do not sleep with the patient, or nonpregnant adults who sleep with the patient. Typical (125)I patients should only avoid sleeping in the "spoon" position (i.e., in contact) with pregnant adults and avoid holding a child for long periods of time in the lap for about 2 months. CONCLUSIONS: The large number of cases available for this study permitted the development of an algorithm to simply determine patient-specific radiation safety instructions. The resulting precaution times are significantly less restrictive than those generally prescribed currently.

Clearance kinetics and external dosimetry of 131I-labeled murine and humanized monoclonal antibody A33 in patients with colon cancer: radiation safety implications.

The monoclonal antibody (mAb) A33 detects a membrane antigen that is expressed on greater than 95% of metastatic human colorectal cancers. Previous studies have shown excellent tumor-targeting of (131)I-labeled murine and humanized forms of the mAb. A retrospective analysis of whole-body clearance in the murine form was performed for comparison to the humanized form. Serial whole-body dose rate measurements were obtained for 55 treatments on 30 patients participating in phase I/II dose escalation studies of therapeutic (131)I-murine A33 mAb. Whole-body retention fractions over time were derived. Each treatment was fit with exponential curves to determine the effective half-lives and corresponding clearance fractions. There was a large variability in the calculated mono-exponential clearance effective half-life time, with a mean value of 36.5 h +/- 8.5 h. A bi-exponential fit of all combined data shows that 60% of the administered dose rapidly clears with a biological half-time of 23.9 h and 40% clears with a slower biological half-time of 101.2 h. The whole-body clearance proved to be more rapid in the murine form when compared with recent studies on the humanized form of radiolabeled A33 mAb. The variability in whole-body clearance reinforces the need for patient-specific tracer dosimetry for clinical care and radiation safety precautions. In addition, the slower clearance of the humanized form of the A33 mAb requires longer term radiation safety precautions than the earlier murine form. As other monoclonal antibodies progress from murine to humanized forms, radiopharmacokinetics should be evaluated for clinical and radiation safety implications.

Estimating radiation doses to the skin from interventional radiology procedures for a patient population with cancer.

PURPOSE: To estimate the peak radiation skin doses for interventional radiology cases performed at a cancer center, identify procedure types likely to result in skin doses exceeding the American College of Radiology's 3 Gy follow-up level, and determine a kerma area product (P(KA)) for use in monitoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was performed to estimate doses from consecutive procedures performed during 2006. Of 6,598 procedures, 3,925 (60%) had P(KA) recorded and were included. Forty-three procedure types are represented. RESULTS: The median estimated peak skin dose was 39 mGy (third quartile, 205 mGy). In 2.6% of the cases, the estimated skin dose exceeded 3 Gy. No procedures resulted in skin doses greater than 15 Gy, and 94% of the cases resulted in skin doses less than 1 Gy. Procedure types with instances of skin doses greater than 1 Gy included hepatic, portal, and other arterial embolizations; diagnostic arteriography; biliary drainages; stent placements and catheter exchanges; nephrostomy/nephroureterostomy; urinary catheter exchanges; inferior vena cava filters; foreign body retrieval; abscess drainage; catheter exchange; and fistulography. Hepatic embolizations, nonhepatic arterial embolizations, and biliary drain/stent procedures were most likely to result in skin doses greater than 1 Gy. Significant variations in skin dose were noted within the same procedure type. No patients were noted to have developed any sequelae from radiation. CONCLUSIONS: It is unlikely that typical cases in an oncologic interventional radiology practice would exceed the Joint Commission's "reviewable sentinel event" skin dose level of 15 Gy. A P(KA) trigger of 300 Gy cm(2) could be used in the authors' clinic to identify follow-up requirements.

Operational radiation safety for PET-CT, SPECT-CT, and cyclotron facilities.

Positron emission tomography (PET) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) are well- established and indispensable imaging modalities in modern medicine. State-of-the-art computed tomography (CT) scanners have now been integrated into multi-modality PET-CT and SPECT-CT devices, and these devices, particularly PET-CT scanners, are dramatically impacting clinical practice. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), by far the most widely used radiopharmaceutical for clinical PET imaging in general and oncologic PET imaging in particular, is highly accurate in detecting (approximately 90%) and staging many types of tumors, monitoring therapy response, and differentiating benign from malignant lesions. Several factors, including the relatively high administered activities [e.g., 370-740 MBq (10-20 mCi) of FDG], the high patient throughput (up to 30 patients per d), and in particular, the uniquely high energies (for a diagnostic setting) of the 511-keV positron-negatron annihilation photons, make shielding requirements, workflow, and other radiation protection issues important considerations in the design of a PET or PET-CT facility. The Report of Task Group 108 of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) provides a comprehensive summary of shielding design and related considerations, along with illustrative calculations. Whether in the form of a PET-CT or a SPECT-CT device, the introduction of CT scanners into a nuclear medicine setting has created new and complex radiation protection issues concerning the radiation burden and attendant risks accrued by patients undergoing such multi-modality procedures (especially in those instances in which higher-dose, diagnostic-quality CT studies are done as part of the PET-CT or SPECT-CT exam). In addition, because PET is dependent on the availability of short-lived 18F (Tp = 110 min) primarily in the form of FDG, and other short-lived positron emitters such as 11C (20 min), 13N (10 min), and 15O (2 min), cyclotrons for production of medically applied radionuclides and associated radiochemistry facilities are now widespread (well over 100 worldwide) and present their own radiation safety issues. In addition to the radioactive product, sources of exposure include neutrons and radioactive activation products in the various cyclotron components and surrounding shielding. Nonetheless, published studies have shown that the radiation doses to personnel working in cyclotron and associated radiochemistry facilities, as well as in PET or PET-CT and SPECT or SPECT-CT facilities, can be maintained below, and generally well below, the pertinent regulatory limits. This presentation will review the basic radiation safety aspects, including shielding and workflow, of these increasingly important and increasingly numerous facilities. The radiation burden accrued by the patients undergoing PET-CT or SPECT-CT exams will be considered as well.