How to experimentally test the accuracy of quantitative SPECT images?

• Autorzy: Piwowarska-Bilska Hanna , Kurkowska Sara , Iwanowski Jacek , Poniatowska Małgorzata , Piwowarski Mateusz , Birkenfeld Bożena

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/pjmpe-2025-0011

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Introduction: Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) uses radiopharmaceuticals that target cancer cells and is increasingly used as an oncological treatment. Estimating the absorbed dose of ionizing radiation in the patient’s organs is the basis for personalized RPT. This article presents a technique for assessing the performance of a quantitative reconstruction using NEMA phantom. The goal of this work was to compare the accuracy of quantitative SPECT images using the same reconstruction algorithm but acquired with two different SPECT/CT systems from two different manufacturers. Materials and Methods: We performed a series of SPECT/CT acquisitions of a NEMA IEC Body Phantom filled with ¹⁷⁷Lu using two gamma cameras. The images were reconstructed and quantified using Hermes software. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the results of recovered activities between the Symbia Intevo Bold and the NM/CT 850 gamma cameras. For a sphere with a diameter of 37 mm, the Rc values ranged from 0.69 to 0.75 for the Symbia Intevo Bold and 0.70 to 0.73 for the NM/CT 850. For a sphere with a diameter of 28 mm, the Rc values ranged from 0.61 to 0.71 for the Symbia Intevo Bold and 0.61 to 0.70 for the NM/CT 850. For a sphere with a diameter of 22 mm, the Rc values fell within the range of 0.56 to 0.63 for the Symbia Intevo Bold and 0.51 to 0.59 for the NM/CT 850. Conclusions: Quantitative SPECT images are necessary to perform dosimetry calculations and before using them in the clinical settings it is important to perform validation. This validation can be simply performed by acquiring images of the phantom filled with known activity using the same acquisition and reconstruction parameters as those employed for patients studies. In our study we observed comparable performance between images acquired by the systems from two different manufacturers.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

SPECT/CT; NEMA phantom; RPT; radiopharmaceutical therapy

• Wydawca: Polskie Towarzystwo Fizyki Medycznej
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering
• Rocznik: 2025
• Tom: Vol. 31, Iss. 2
• Strony: 104--109
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 23 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Piwowarska-Bilska Hanna

• Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3617-7687

autor

Kurkowska Sara

• Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5101-8911

autor

Iwanowski Jacek

• Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7252-8985

autor

Poniatowska Małgorzata

• Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2632-7186

autor

Piwowarski Mateusz

• Department of Decision Support Methods and Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2541-1909

autor

Birkenfeld Bożena

• Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1174-8199

Bibliografia

• 1. Lepareur N, Ramee B, Mougin-Degraef M, Bourgeois M. Clinical Advances and Perspectives in Targeted Radionuclide Therapy. Pharmaceutics. 2023;15:1733. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15061733.
• 2. Shah HJ, Ruppell E, Bokhari R, Aland P, Lele VR, Ge C, McIntosh LJ. Current and upcoming radionuclide therapies in the direction of precision oncology: A narrative review. Eur J Radiol Open. 2023;31(10):100477. doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100477.
• 3. Sgouros G, Dewaraja YK, Escorcia F, Graves SA, Hope TA, Iravani A, et al. Tumor Response to Radiopharmaceutical Therapies: The Knowns and the Unknowns. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:12S-22S.
• 4. Piwowarska-Bilska H, Kurkowska S, Birkenfeld B. Individualization of Radionuclide Therapies: Challenges and Prospects. Cancers. 2022;14:3418. doi:10.3390/cancers14143418.
• 5. Echigo H, Mishiro K, Munekane M, Fuchigami T, Washiyama K, Takahashi K, et al. Development of probes for radiotheranostics with albumin binding moiety to increase the therapeutic effects of astatine-211 (211At). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-023-06457-0.
• 6. Huizing DMV, de Wit-van der Veen BJ, Verheij M, Stokkel MPM. Dosimetry methods and clinical applications in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy for neuroendocrine tumours: a literature review. EJNMMI Res. 2018;8(1):89. doi: 10.1186/s13550-018-0443-z.
• 7. Sjogreen Gleisner K, Chouin N, Gabina PM, Cicone F, Gnesin S, Stokke C, et al. EANM dosimetry committee recommendations for dosimetry of 177Lulabelled somatostatin-receptor- and PSMA-targeting ligands. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging. 2022;49:1778-1809.
• 8. Alipour R, Jackson P, Bressel M, Hogg A, Callahan J, Hicks RJ, et al. The relationship between tumour dosimetry, response, and overall survival in patients with unresectable Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (NEN) treated with 177Lu DOTATATE (LuTate). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;50(10):2997-3010. doi: 10.1007/s00259-023-06257-6.
• 9. O’Donoghue J, Zanzonico P, Humm J, Kesner A. Dosimetry in Radiopharmaceutical Therapy. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2022;63(10):1467-1474. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.121.262305.
• 10. Bardies M, Gear JI. Scientific Developments in Imaging and Dosimetry for Molecular Radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2021;33(2):117-124. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.11.005.
• 11. Hermes Medical Solution. HybridViewer Dosimetry Handbook version 5.1 2020.
• 12. Gnesin S, Leite Ferreira P, Malterre J, Laub P, Prior JO, Verdun FR. Phantom Validation of Tc-99m Absolute Quantification in a SPECT/CT Commercial Device. Comput Math Methods Med. 2016;2016:4360371. doi: 10.1155/2016/4360371.
• 13. Marin, G., Vanderlinden, B., Karfis, I. et al. Accuracy and precision assessment for activity quantification in individualized dosimetry of 177Lu-DOTATATE therapy. EJNMMI Phys. 2017;4(1):7.
• 14. Staanum PF. Tumor dosimetry using 177Lu: influence of background activity, measurement method and reconstruction algorithm. EJNMMI Phys. 2023;10(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s40658-023-00561-8.
• 15. Huizing DMV, Sinaasappel M, Dekker MC, Stokkel MPM, de Wit-van der Veen BJ. 177 Lutetium SPECT/CT: Evaluation of collimator, photopeak and scatter correction. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2020;21(9):272-277. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12991.
• 16. Tran-Gia Q J, Lassmann M. Characterization of Noise and Resolution for Quantitative 177Lu SPECT/CT with xSPECT. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2019;60(1):50-59. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.118.211094.
• 17. Tran-Gia J, Denis-Bacelar AM, Ferreira KM, Robinson AP, Calvert N, Fenwicket AJ, et al. A multicentre and multi-national evaluation of the accuracy of quantitative Lu-177 SPECT/CT imaging performed within the MRTDosimetry project. EJNMMI Phys. 2021;8:55. ttps://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-021-00397-0.
• 18. Di Domenico G, Di Biaso S, Longo L, et al. Validation of 99mTc and 177Lu quantification parameters for a Monte Carlo modelled gamma camera. EJNMMI Phys. 2023;10:27.
• 19. Peters SMB, Meyer Viol SL, van der Werf NR, de Jong N, van Velden FHP, Meeuwis A, Konijnenberg MW, Gotthardt M, de Jong HWAM, Segbers M. Variability in lutetium-177 SPECT quantification between different state-of-the-art SPECT/CT systems. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s40658-020-0278-3.
• 20. Zhao W, Esquinas PL, Hou X, Uribe CF, Gonzalez M, Beauregard JM, Dewaraja YK, Celler A. Determination of gamma camera calibration factors for quantitation of therapeutic radioisotopes. EJNMMI Phys. 2018;5(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s40658-018-0208-9.
• 21. Mezzenga E, D’Errico V, D’Arienzo M, Strigari L, Panagiota K, Matteucci F, Severi S, Paganelli G, Fenwick A, Bianchini D, Marcocci F, Sarnelli A. Quantitative accuracy of 177Lu SPECT imaging for molecular radiotherapy. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0182888. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182888.
• 22. D’Arienzo M, Cazzato M, Cozzella ML, Cox M, D’Andrea M, Fazio A, Fenwick A, Iaccarino G, Johansson L, Strigari L, Ungania S, De Felice P. Gamma camera calibration and validation for quantitative SPECT imaging with (177)Lu. Appl Radiat Isot. 2016;112:156-164. doi: 10.1016/j. apradiso.2016.03.007.
• 23. Huizing DMV, Peters SMB, Versleijen MWJ, Martens E, Verheij M, Sinaasappel M, Stokkel MPM, de Wit-van der Veen BJ. A head-to-head comparison between two commercial software packages for hybrid dosimetry after peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. EJNMMI Phys. 2020;7(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s40658-020-00308-9.