Impact of the Reference Multiple-Time-Point Dosimetry Protocol on the Validity of Single-Time-Point Dosimetry for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T Therapy

Abstract

Internal dosimetry supports safe and effective patient management during radionuclide therapy. Yet, it is associated with high clinical workload, costs, and patient burden, as patient scans at multiple time points (MTPs) must be acquired. Dosimetry based on imaging at a single time point (STP) has continuously gained popularity. However, MTP protocols, used as a reference to judge the validity of STP dosimetry, differ depending on local requirements and deviate from the unknown patient-specific ground truth pharmacokinetics. The aim of this study was to compare the error and optimum time point for different STP approaches using different reference MTP protocols. Methods: Whole-body SPECT/CT scans of 7 patients (7.4–8.9 GBq of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T) were scheduled at 24, 48, 72, and 168 h after injection. Sixty lesions, 14 kidneys, and 10 submandibular glands were delineated in the SPECT/CT data. Two curve models, that is, a mono- and a biexponential model, were fitted to the MTP data, in accordance with goodness-of-fit analysis (coefficients of variation, sum of squared errors). Three population-based STP approaches were compared: one method published by Hanscheid € et al., one by Jackson et al., and one using population-based effective half-lives in the mono- or biexponential curve models. Percentage differences between STP and MTP dosimetry were evaluated. Results: Goodness-of-fit parameters show that a monoexponential function and a biexponential function with shared population-based parameters and physical tail are reasonable reference models. When comparing both reference models, we observed maximum differences of 244%, 219%, and 228% in the estimated absorbed doses for lesions, kidneys, and salivary glands, respectively. STP dosimetry with an average deviation of less than 10% from MTP dosimetry may be feasible; however, this deviation and the optimum imaging time point showed a dependence on the chosen reference protocol. Conclusion: STP dosimetry for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy is promising to boost the integration of dosimetry into clinical routine. According to our patient cohort, 48 h after injection may be regarded as a compromise for STP dosimetry for lesions and at-risk organs. The results from this analysis show that a common gold standard for dosimetry is desirable to allow for reliable and comparable STP dosimetry.