Patient-specific dosimetry adapted to variable number of SPECT/CT time-points per cycle for Lu-DOTATATE therapy.

BACKGROUND

The number of SPECT/CT time-points is important for accurate patient dose estimation in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. However, it may be limited by the patient's health and logistical reasons. Here,  an image-based dosimetric workflow adapted to the number of SPECT/CT acquisitions available throughout the treatment cycles was proposed, taking into account patient-specific pharmacokinetics and usable in clinic for all organs at risk.

METHODS

Thirteen patients with neuroendocrine tumors were treated with four injections of 7.4 GBq of Lu-DOTATATE. Three SPECT/CT images were acquired during the first cycle (1H, 24H and 96H or 144H post-injection) and a single acquisition (24H) for following cycles. Absorbed doses were estimated for kidneys (LK and RK), liver (L), spleen (S), and three surrogates of bone marrow (L2 to L4, L1 to L5 and T9 to L5) that were compared. 3D dose rate distributions were computed with Monte Carlo simulations. Voxel dose rates were averaged at the organ level. The obtained Time Dose-Rate Curves (TDRC) were fitted with a tri-exponential model and time-integrated. This method modeled patient-specific uptake and clearance phases observed at cycle 1. Obtained fitting parameters were reused for the following cycles, scaled to the measure organ dose rate at 24H. An alternative methodology was proposed when some acquisitions were missing based on population average TDRC (named STP-Inter). Seven other patients with three SPECT/CT acquisitions at cycles 1 and 4 were included to estimate the uncertainty of the proposed methods.

RESULTS

Absorbed doses (in Gy) per cycle available were: 3.1 ± 1.1 (LK), 3.4 ± 1.5 (RK), 4.5 ± 2.8 (L), 4.6 ± 1.8 (S), 0.3 ± 0.2 (bone marrow). There was a significant difference between bone marrow surrogates (L2 to L4 and L1 to L5, Wilcoxon's test: p value < 0.05), and while depicting very doses, all three surrogates were significantly different than dose in background (p value < 0.01). At cycle 1, if the acquisition at 24H is missing and approximated, medians of percentages of dose difference (PDD) compared to the initial tri-exponential function were inferior to 3.3% for all organs. For cycles with one acquisition, the median errors were smaller with a late time-point. For STP-Inter, medians of PDD were inferior to 7.7% for all volumes, but it was shown to depend on the homogeneity of TDRC.

CONCLUSION

The proposed workflow allows the estimation of organ doses, including bone marrow, from a variable number of time-points acquisitions for patients treated with Lu-DOTATATE.