The biological effectiveness of targeted radionuclide therapy based on a whole-body pharmacokinetic model.
Biologically effective dose (BED) may be more of a relevant quantity than absorbed dose for establishing tumour response relationships. By taking into account the dose rate and tissue-specific parameters such as repair and radiosensitivity, it is possible to compare the relative biological effects of different targeted radionuclide therapy (TRT) agents. The aim of this work was to develop an analytical tumour BED calculation for TRT that could predict a relative biological effect based on normal body and tumour pharmacokinetics. This work represents a step in the direction of establishing relative pharmacokinetic criteria of when the BED formalism is more applicable than absorbed dose for TRT. A previously established pharmacokinetic (PK) model for TRT was used and adapted into the BED formalism. An analytical equation for the protraction factor, which incorporates dose rate and repair rate, was derived. Dose rates within the normal body and tumour were related to the slopes of their time-activity curves which were determined by the ratios of their respective PK parameters. The relationships between the tumour influx-to-efflux ratio (k(34):k(43)), central compartment efflux-to-influx ratio (k(12):k(21)), central elimination (k(el)), and tumour repair rate (μ), and tumour BED were investigated. As the k(34):k(43) ratio increases and the k(12):k(21) ratio decreases, the difference between tumour BED and D increases. In contrast, as the k(34):k(43) ratios decrease and the k(12):k(21) ratios increase, the tumour BED approaches D. At large k(34):k(43) ratios, the difference between tumour BED and D increases to a maximum as k(el) increases. At small k(34):k(43) ratios, the tumour BED approaches D at very small k(el). At small μ and small k(34):k(43) ratios, the tumour BED approaches D. For large k(34):k(43) ratios, large μ values cause tumour BED to approach D. This work represents a step in the direction of establishing relative PK criteria of when the BED formalism is more applicable than absorbed dose for TRT. It also provides a framework by which the biological effects of different TRT agents can be compared in order to predict efficacy.
Grudzinski
Joseph J
JJ
Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705, USA. grudzinski@wisc.edu
Tomé
Wolfgang
W
Weichert
Jamey P
JP
Jeraj
Robert
R
D008954:Models, Biological; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000378:metabolism / Q000532:radiotherapy; D011868:Radioisotopes / Q000493:pharmacokinetics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D012062:Relative Biological Effectiveness; D015203:Reproducibility of Results
D011868:Radioisotopes
Semin Radiat Oncol. 2000 Apr;10(2):115-22
10727600
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 May 1;59(1):228-41
15093920
Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2010 Aug;25(4):417-26
20735205
Med Phys. 2005 Dec;32(12):3666-77
16475766
Cancer Res. 1995 Dec 1;55(23 Suppl):5811s-5816s
7493351
Cancer Res. 2003 Sep 1;63(17):5496-504
14500386
Med Phys. 2009 Mar;36(3):904-7
19378750
Clin Cancer Res. 2004 Dec 1;10(23):8048-58
15585640
Ann Oncol. 2007 Nov;18(11):1782-92
17434893
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990 May;18(5):1261-9
2347734
Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2007 Feb;22(1):143-50
17627423
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010 May;37(5):862-73
20069297
J Nucl Med. 2005 Jan;46 Suppl 1:99S-106S
15653658
Int J Radiat Biol. 2003 Feb;79(2):71-81
12569011
Br J Radiol. 1989 Mar;62(735):241-4
2702381
Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2005 Feb;20(1):47-51
15778580
Med Phys. 2006 Jun;33(6):1857-66
16872093
J Nucl Med. 2008 Nov;49(11):1884-99
18927342
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002 Dec;29(12):1657-68
12458401
J Nucl Med. 1998 Jan;39(1):65-76
9443740
Br J Radiol. 1985 Jun;58(690):515-28
4063711
Acta Oncol. 2002;41(7-8):623-8
14651205
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jul 15;21(14):2760-76
12860956
Int J Radiat Biol. 1997 Oct;72(4):351-74
9343102
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;66(2 Suppl):S89-95
16979448
Phys Med Biol. 1996 Oct;41(10):1871-84
8912367
Br J Radiol. 1991 Mar;64(759):242-51
2021798
Int J Radiat Biol. 1988 Jul;54(1):13-9
2899610
J Nucl Med. 2000 Feb;41(2):297-308
10688115
Radiat Res. 1998 Jul;150(1):83-91
9650605
J Nucl Med. 2005 May;46(5):900-1; author reply 901
15872369
Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2003 Feb;18(1):89-97
12667312
J Nucl Med. 1999 Aug;40(8):1337-41
10450686
Med Phys. 2008 Jul;35(7):3062-8
18697529
Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2005 Apr;20(2):126-40
15869446
Phys Med Biol. 1997 Sep;42(9):1727-36
9308079