ArticleThe British journal of radiology2016
Estimation of human absorbed dose for (166)Ho-PAM: comparison with (166)Ho-DOTMP and (166)Ho-TTHMP.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-in-human dosimetry and safety evaluation ofScientific reports · 2025Article
- The various therapeutic applications of the medical isotope holmium-166: a narrative review.EJNMMI radiopharmacy and chemistry · 2019Review
- Human Absorbed Dose Estimation ofJournal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn this study, the human absorbed dose of holmium-166 ((166)Ho)-pamidronate (PAM) as a potential agent for the management of multiple myeloma was estimated.
methods(166)Ho-PAM complex was prepared at optimized conditions and injected into the rats. The equivalent and effective absorbed doses to human organs after injection of the complex were estimated by radiation-absorbed dose assessment resource and methods proposed by Sparks et al based on rat data. The red marrow to other organ absorbed dose ratios were compared with these data for (166)Ho-DOTMP, as the only clinically used (166)Ho bone marrow ablative agent, and (166)Ho-TTHMP.
resultsThe highest absorbed dose amounts are observed in the bone surface and bone marrow with 1.11 and 0.903 mGy MBq(-1), respectively. Most other organs would receive approximately insignificant absorbed dose. While (166)Ho-PAM demonstrated a higher red marrow to total body absorbed dose ratio than (166)Ho-1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclo dodecane-1,4,7,10 tetra ethylene phosphonic acid (DOTMP) and (166)Ho-triethylene tetramine hexa (methylene phosphonic acid) (TTHMP), the red marrow to most organ absorbed dose ratios for (166)Ho-TTHMP and (166)Ho-PAM are much higher than the ratios for (166)Ho-DOTMP.
conclusionThe result showed that (166)Ho-PAM has significant characteristics than (166)Ho-DOTMP and therefore, this complex can be considered as a good agent for bone marrow ablative therapy. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: In this work, two separate points have been investigated: (1) human absorbed dose of (166)Ho-PAM, as a potential bone marrow ablative agent, has been estimated; and (2) the complex has been compared with (166)Ho-DOTMP, as the only clinically used bone marrow ablative radiopharmaceutical, showing significant characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.