Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24832581›Full record

ReviewSeminars in nuclear medicine2014

Dosimetry for radiopharmaceutical therapy.

George Sgouros, Robert F Hobbs

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in nuclear medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Reconstructed SPECT images ofScientific data · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Current Status of Radiopharmaceutical Therapy.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. The Role of Theranostics in Prostate Cancer.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2021
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

George SgourosJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: gsgouros@jhmi.edu.
Robert F HobbsJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Dose-Response in Radionuclide TherapyR01CA116477 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HOBBS, ROBERT FRANCOIS, SGOUROS, GEORGE · 2006 to 2022
$7.1M
Dose Reduction in Pediatric Molecular ImagingR01EB013558 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FREY, ERIC C., SGOUROS, GEORGE · 2012 to 2020
$4.6M
Modeling Targeted Alpha Particle Therapy of CancerR01CA157542 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HOBBS, ROBERT FRANCOIS · 2012 to 2015
$1.3M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA116477NCI NIH HHS R01 CA157542NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB013558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) involves the use of radionuclides that are either conjugated to tumor-targeting agents (e.g., nanoscale constructs, antibodies, peptides, and small molecules) or concentrated in tissue through natural physiological mechanisms that occur predominantly in neoplastic or otherwise targeted cells (e.g., Graves disease). The ability to collect pharmacokinetic data by imaging and use this to perform dosimetry calculations for treatment planning distinguishes RPT from other systemic treatment modalities such as chemotherapy, wherein imaging is not generally used. Treatment planning has not been widely adopted, in part, because early attempts to relate dosimetry to outcome were not successful. This was partially because a dosimetry methodology appropriate to risk evaluation rather than efficacy and toxicity was being applied to RPT. The weakest links in both diagnostic and therapeutic dosimetry are the accuracy of the input and the reliability of the radiobiological models used to convert dosimetric data to the relevant biologic end points. Dosimetry for RPT places a greater demand on both of these weak links. To date, most dosimetric studies have been retrospective, with a focus on tumor dose-response correlations rather than prospective treatment planning. In this regard, transarterial radioembolization also known as intra-arterial radiation therapy, which uses radiolabeled ((90)Y) microspheres of glass or resin to treat lesions in the liver holds much promise for more widespread dosimetric treatment planning. The recent interest in RPT with alpha-particle emitters has highlighted the need to adopt a dosimetry methodology that specifically accounts for the unique aspects of alpha particles. The short range of alpha-particle emitters means that in cases in which the distribution of activity is localized to specific functional components or cell types of an organ, the absorbed dose will be equally localized and dosimetric calculations on the scale of organs or even voxels (~5mm) are no longer sufficient. This limitation may be overcome by using preclinical models to implement macromodeling to micromodeling. In contrast to chemotherapy, RPT offers the possibility of evaluating radiopharmaceutical distributions, calculating tumor and normal tissue absorbed doses, and devising a treatment plan that is optimal for a specific patient or specific group of patients.

Indexed as

Alpha ParticlesAnimalsEndpoint DeterminationHumansRadiometryRadiopharmaceuticalsRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedUncertaintyRadiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID24832581
PMCPMC4034172
OpenAlexW2085400402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.