4.4 Article

Comparative dosimetry of copper-64 and yttrium-90-labeled somatostatin analogs in a tumor-bearing rat model

Journal

CANCER BIOTHERAPY AND RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages 593-604

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT INC PUBL
DOI: 10.1089/cbr.2000.15.593

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA86307, R01 CA064475, CA64475] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Y-90-DOTA -tyrosine(3)-octreotide (Y-90-DOTA-Y3-OC) is currently being evaluated as a radiotherapy agent for trials in patients with somatostatin-receptor positive cancer. In this study, we compared the estimated absorbed doses to human organs, as well as to a CA20948 rat tumor, of Y-90- and Cu-64-labeled DOTA-Y3-OC and DOTA-Y3-octreotate (DOTA-Y3-TATE). Assuming that the radiopharmaceutical biodistributions are the same in rodents and humans, human absorbed dose estimates were obtained from rat biodistribution data. The absorbed doses of Y-90-DOTA-Y3-TATE were determined from the biodistribution of the Y-88-labeled peptide, with and without co-injection of a therapeutic amount of the Y-90-labeled peptide. Additionally, the absorbed doses of Y-90-DOTA-Y3-TATE were determined from data using two different biodistribution endpoints, 48 h and 168 h. Human absorbed dose estimates were calculated using MIRD methodology assuming that rats and humans have the same biodistribution. The biodistribution of the radiolabeled somatostatin analogs was dependent on the peptide and the radiometal. For 90Y-DOTA-Y3-TATE, the tumor dose was dependent on both the administration of therapeutic Y-90-peptide and the biodistribution endpoint. Our data suggested that, for both radionuclides, the TATE derivatives imparted a higher absorbed dose to the tumor than the OC analogs. Y-90-DOTA-Y3-OC and Cu-64-DOTA-Y3-OC were comparable with respect to their tumor-to-normal tissue dose ratios, while Y-90-DOTA-Y3-TATE appeared to have distinct advantages over Cu-64-DOTA-Y3-TATE.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available