Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39790832›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, India

Radiation Safety Assessment of 177Lu-DOTATATE Intra-arterial Peptide Receptor Therapy (PRRT).

Manoj Kumar Hariram Chauhan, Ashish Kumar Jha, Sneha Mithun, Rutuja Dasharath Parab, Pooja Dwivedi, Ameya D Puranik, Kunal Bharat Gala, Nitin Sudhakar Shetye, Suyash Kulkarni, Venkatesh Rangarajan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, India. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Manoj Kumar Hariram ChauhanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Ashish Kumar JhaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Tata Memorial Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Sneha MithunDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Tata Memorial Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Rutuja Dasharath ParabDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Tata Memorial Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Pooja DwivediDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Ameya D PuranikDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Tata Memorial Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Kunal Bharat GalaDepartment of Radiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Nitin Sudhakar ShetyeDepartment of Radiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Suyash KulkarniDepartment of Radiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Venkatesh RangarajanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Materials and Methods: Radiation safety-related data of 31 patients who underwent 177Lu-DOTATATE intra-arterial PRRT treatment were used for this study. The exposure rate was measured at the hand and eye and chest level of treating intervention radiologists continuously from the beginning to the end of the administration. Exposure from the patient at the body surface (at the level of liver, thigh, and extremities) and 1 m from the body surface was measured just after the administration. The mean radiation exposure from the patient at the body surface and 1 m from the body was also calculated. Results: The mean administered activity was found to be 194 (±17) mCi. The mean radiation exposure at the surface at the level of the liver, thigh, and feet and at 1 m from the surface was found to be 100 (±25.11), 9 (±1.27), 5.6 (±0.52), and 5.3± (0.50) μSv/hr, respectively. The mean administration time was found to be 23 ± 5.6 min. The mean radiation dose to the hands, and eyes, of the treating intervention radiologist per procedure, was found to be 6.425 ± 2.75 μSv, 5.43 ± 1.76 μSv and 1-m exposure from the patient was found to be 5.3 ± 0.246 μSv, respectively. Conclusion: Our result shows that the radiation exposure from the patient postadministration is below the permissible limit of discharge. The radiation exposure to the intervention radiologist is also suggestive of a safe procedure to be performed by maintaining the radiation dose well within the permissible limit for radiation professionals.

Indexed as

177Lu177Lu-DOTATATEintra-arterialneuroendocrine tumorpeptide receptor therapy

Identifiers

PMID39790832
PMCPMC11708803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.