title: Assessment of S values in stylized and voxel-based rat models for positron-emitting radionuclides.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Positron emission tomography (PET) is a powerful tool in small animal research, enabling noninvasive quantitative imaging of biochemical processes in living subjects. However, the dosimetric characteristics of small animal PET imaging are usually overlooked, although the radiation dose may be significant. The variations of anatomical characteristics between the various computational models may result in differences in the dosimetric outcome.
  
  
  METHODS
  We used five different anatomical rat models (two stylized and three voxel based) to compare calculated absorbed fractions and S values for eight positron-emitting radionuclides (C-11, N-13, O-15, F-18, Cu-64, Ga-68, Y-86, and I-124) commonly used to label various probes for small animal PET imaging. The MCNPX radiation transport code was used for radiation dose calculations.
  
  
  RESULTS
  For most source/target organ pairs, O-15 and Ga-68 produce the highest self-absorbed S values because of the high-energy and high-frequency of positron emissions, while Y-86 produces the highest cross-absorbed S values because of the high energy and high frequency of γ-rays emission. Anatomical models produced from different rat strains or modeling techniques exhibit different organ masses, volumes, and thus give rise to different S values and absorbed dose. The variations of absorbed fractions between models of the same type are less than those between models with different types. The calculated S values depend strongly on organ mass, and as such, different models produce similar S values for organs of comparable masses. In most source organs presenting with high cumulated activity, the absorbed dose is less affected by model difference compared with other organs.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The produced S values for common positron-emitting radionuclides can be exploited in the assessment of radiation dose to rats from different radiotracers used in small animal PET experiments. This work contributes to a better understanding of the influence of different computational models on small animal dosimetry.
authors.affiliation: Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, CH-1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland.
authors.forename: Tianwu
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Xie
authors.forename: Habib
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Zaidi
mesh_terms: D000042:Absorption; D000818:Animals; D002250:Carbon Radioisotopes; D004583:Electrons; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional; D008953:Models, Anatomic; D009928:Organ Specificity; D049268:Positron-Emission Tomography; D011868:Radioisotopes / Q000737:chemistry*; D051381:Rats; D014916:Whole-Body Irradiation
chemical_list: D002250:Carbon Radioisotopes; D011868:Radioisotopes
references.citation: Med Phys. 2008 Aug;35(8):3759-64
references.pmid: 18777935
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2010 Mar;51(3):471-6
references.pmid: 20197451
references.citation: Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2005 Aug;20(4):436-49
references.pmid: 16114992
references.citation: Med Phys. 2010 May;37(5):2167-78
references.pmid: 20527551
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2007 Feb 7;52(3):577-87
references.pmid: 17228106
references.citation: Mol Imaging Biol. 2004 May-Jun;6(3):149-59
references.pmid: 15193249
references.citation: Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007 Dec;51(4):343-51
references.pmid: 17538523
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002 Jan;29(1):98-114
references.pmid: 11807613
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2004 Nov;45(11):1960-5
references.pmid: 15534069
references.citation: Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2012 Jan;148(1):9-19
references.pmid: 21447507
references.citation: Ann ICRP. 2002;32(3-4):5-265
references.pmid: 14506981
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2004 Jul;45(7):1260-9
references.pmid: 15235075
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2013 Jan 7;58(1):169-82
references.pmid: 23221270
references.citation: Nucl Med Commun. 2007 Jun;28(6):427-9
references.pmid: 17460532
references.citation: Med Phys. 2007 Mar;34(3):1026-36
references.pmid: 17441249
references.citation: Mol Biosyst. 2007 Jan;3(1):30-5
references.pmid: 17216053
references.citation: Radiat Res. 2001 Jul;156(1):28-35
references.pmid: 11418070
references.citation: Mutat Res. 1971 Jan;11(1):107-23
references.pmid: 5556347
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2006 Apr;47(4):655-9
references.pmid: 16595500
references.citation: Med Phys. 2004 Sep;31(9):2680-6
references.pmid: 15487751
references.citation: Cancer. 1994 Feb 1;73(3 Suppl):951-7
references.pmid: 8306284
references.citation: Acta Oncol. 2011 Aug;50(6):973-80
references.pmid: 21767199
references.citation: Med Phys. 2012 Mar;39(3):1462-72
references.pmid: 22380379
references.citation: Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2007 Jun;22(3):438-42
references.pmid: 17651052
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2003 May;44(5):784-91
references.pmid: 12732681
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2009 Mar;50(3):477-84
references.pmid: 19258258
references.citation: Mol Imaging Biol. 2005 Jan-Feb;7(1):53-8
references.pmid: 15912276
references.citation: Nucl Med Biol. 2002 Jul;29(5):509-15
references.pmid: 12088720
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2008 May;49(5):853-60
references.pmid: 18413398
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2008 Oct 7;53(19):5343-55
references.pmid: 18758003
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2007 Feb 21;52(4):1013-25
references.pmid: 17264367
references.citation: PET Clin. 2007 Apr;2(2):125-60
references.pmid: 27157870