Model-based versus specific dosimetry in diagnostic context: Comparison of three dosimetric approaches.
Saved in:
| Title: | Model-based versus specific dosimetry in diagnostic context: Comparison of three dosimetric approaches. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Marcatili, S.1, Villoing, D.1, Mauxion, T.1, McParland, B. J.2, Bardiès, M.1 |
| Source: | Medical Physics. Mar2015, Vol. 42 Issue 3, p1288-1296. 9p. |
| Subjects: | Radiation dosimetry, Medical radiography, Radioactive tracers, Radiation doses, Nuclear medicine |
| Abstract: | Purpose: The dosimetric assessment of novel radiotracers represents a legal requirement in most countries. While the techniques for the computation of internal absorbed dose in a therapeutic context have made huge progresses in recent years, in a diagnostic scenario the absorbed dose is usually extracted from model-based lookup tables, most often derived from International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) or Medical Internal Radiation Dose (MIRD) Committee models. The level of approximation introduced by these models may impact the resulting dosimetry. The aim of this work is to establish whether a more refined approach to dosimetry can be implemented in nuclear medicine diagnostics, by analyzing a specific case. Methods: The authors calculated absorbed doses to various organs in six healthy volunteers administered with flutemetamol (18F) injection. Each patient underwent from 8 to 10 whole body 3D PET/CT scans. This dataset was analyzed using a Monte Carlo (MC) application developed in-house using the toolkit GATE that is capable to take into account patient-specific anatomy and radiotracer distribution at the voxel level. They compared the absorbed doses obtained with GATE to those calculated with two commercially available software: OLINDA/EXM and STRATOS implementing a dose voxel kernel convolution approach. Results: Absorbed doses calculated with GATE were higher than those calculated with OLINDA. The average ratio between GATE absorbed doses and OLINDA'S was 1.38 ± 0.34 a (from 0.93 to 2.23). The discrepancy was particularly high for the thyroid, with an average GATE/OLINDA ratio of 1.97 ± 0.83 a for the six patients. Differences between STRATOS and GATE were found to be higher. The average ratio between GATE and STRATOS absorbed doses was 2.51 ± 1.21 a (from 1.09 to 6.06). Conclusions: This study demonstrates how the choice of the absorbed dose calculation algorithm may introduce a bias when gamma radiations are of importance, as is the case in nuclear medicine diagnostics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Medical Physics is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: egs DbLabel: Engineering Source An: 101401668 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Model-based versus specific dosimetry in diagnostic context: Comparison of three dosimetric approaches. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Marcatili%2C+S%2E%22">Marcatili, S.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Villoing%2C+D%2E%22">Villoing, D.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mauxion%2C+T%2E%22">Mauxion, T.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McParland%2C+B%2E+J%2E%22">McParland, B. J.</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bardiès%2C+M%2E%22">Bardiès, M.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Medical+Physics%22">Medical Physics</searchLink>. Mar2015, Vol. 42 Issue 3, p1288-1296. 9p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Radiation+dosimetry%22">Radiation dosimetry</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+radiography%22">Medical radiography</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Radioactive+tracers%22">Radioactive tracers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Radiation+doses%22">Radiation doses</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Nuclear+medicine%22">Nuclear medicine</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Purpose: The dosimetric assessment of novel radiotracers represents a legal requirement in most countries. While the techniques for the computation of internal absorbed dose in a therapeutic context have made huge progresses in recent years, in a diagnostic scenario the absorbed dose is usually extracted from model-based lookup tables, most often derived from International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) or Medical Internal Radiation Dose (MIRD) Committee models. The level of approximation introduced by these models may impact the resulting dosimetry. The aim of this work is to establish whether a more refined approach to dosimetry can be implemented in nuclear medicine diagnostics, by analyzing a specific case. Methods: The authors calculated absorbed doses to various organs in six healthy volunteers administered with flutemetamol (18F) injection. Each patient underwent from 8 to 10 whole body 3D PET/CT scans. This dataset was analyzed using a Monte Carlo (MC) application developed in-house using the toolkit GATE that is capable to take into account patient-specific anatomy and radiotracer distribution at the voxel level. They compared the absorbed doses obtained with GATE to those calculated with two commercially available software: OLINDA/EXM and STRATOS implementing a dose voxel kernel convolution approach. Results: Absorbed doses calculated with GATE were higher than those calculated with OLINDA. The average ratio between GATE absorbed doses and OLINDA'S was 1.38 ± 0.34 a (from 0.93 to 2.23). The discrepancy was particularly high for the thyroid, with an average GATE/OLINDA ratio of 1.97 ± 0.83 a for the six patients. Differences between STRATOS and GATE were found to be higher. The average ratio between GATE and STRATOS absorbed doses was 2.51 ± 1.21 a (from 1.09 to 6.06). Conclusions: This study demonstrates how the choice of the absorbed dose calculation algorithm may introduce a bias when gamma radiations are of importance, as is the case in nuclear medicine diagnostics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Medical Physics is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=101401668 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1118/1.4907957 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 9 StartPage: 1288 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Radiation dosimetry Type: general – SubjectFull: Medical radiography Type: general – SubjectFull: Radioactive tracers Type: general – SubjectFull: Radiation doses Type: general – SubjectFull: Nuclear medicine Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Model-based versus specific dosimetry in diagnostic context: Comparison of three dosimetric approaches. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Marcatili, S. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Villoing, D. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Mauxion, T. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: McParland, B. J. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Bardiès, M. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 03 Text: Mar2015 Type: published Y: 2015 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 00942405 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 42 – Type: issue Value: 3 Titles: – TitleFull: Medical Physics Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
