Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Meeting ReportMolecular Targeting Technologies - Radioactive and Nonradioactive Probes: Radiopharmacy

Comparison of compounded and commercial chromic phosphate P 32 suspensions

Robert McKenzie, Mark Jacobson and Joseph Hung
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2011, 52 (supplement 1) 1641;
Robert McKenzie
2AnazaoHealth Corporation, Tampa, FL
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark Jacobson
1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph Hung
1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

1641

Objectives To make chromic phosphate P 32 as a true colloid and with properties equivalent to the commercial product that was removed from the US market in August 2009. The compounding of this radiopharmaceutical keeps this important therapeutic option available for physicians and their patients.

Methods Three batches of chromic phosphate P 32 suspensions were made by binding P 32 solution to chromium oxide, and then excess P 32 was removed. The particles were reduced to a 0.1-µm size by grinding, centrifuging, and filtering processes. Sodium sulfite was added forming a colloid and a protective gelatin coating was added to the colloidal particles. Samples from each batch were placed in a 10-mL empty sterile vial and marked A, B, C then autoclaved. Each batch was tested for radiochemical purity (RCP) using ITLC and a radio-TLC strip scanner (Bicron 3000). Approximately 5-µL of sample was placed onto a carbon coated grid and allowed to completely dry. The grid was then washed (3X) with distilled water to dissolve the salt crystals and allowed to dry prior to evaluation in the electron microscope (FEI Tecnai 12). A hemocytometer with a 40-µm grid was used to verify particle size (< 1 µm) under a light microscope. pH measurement, bacterial endotoxins test, and sterility test were also carried out for each batch. A fourth sample was taken from a vial of Phosphocol P 32 (Covidien, Hazelwood, MO) and labeled M as a reference standard.

Results The three batches of compounded chromic phosphate P 32 A, B, and C preparations were measured against the commercial Phosphocol P 32 suspension. RCP on each of 4 batches was found to be 100%, particle size was determined to be 0.1 to 0.3 µm, pH was 5.0, endotoxins level was less than 2 EU/mL, no bacterial, mold, or fungal growth observed at 14 days after inoculation.

Conclusions The compounded chromic phosphate P 32 microaggragate was found to be comparable to the commercial Phosphocol P 32 suspension in all critical quality attributes. A macroaggragate size of chromic phosphate P 32 has also been made by reducing the particle size to a 1-um size

Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 52, Issue supplement 1
May 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comparison of compounded and commercial chromic phosphate P 32 suspensions
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Comparison of compounded and commercial chromic phosphate P 32 suspensions
Robert McKenzie, Mark Jacobson, Joseph Hung
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2011, 52 (supplement 1) 1641;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Comparison of compounded and commercial chromic phosphate P 32 suspensions
Robert McKenzie, Mark Jacobson, Joseph Hung
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2011, 52 (supplement 1) 1641;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Molecular Targeting Technologies - Radioactive and Nonradioactive Probes: Radiopharmacy

  • Simple automated radiosynthesis of 10-[11C]methoxy-20(S)-camptothecin and biodistribution in normal mice
  • Potential evaluation of 111In-Hexa lactoside as a novel functional liver imaging agent
  • Modified technique for manual synthesis of 68Ga-Citrate with high radiochemical purity
Show more Molecular Targeting Technologies - Radioactive and Nonradioactive Probes: Radiopharmacy

Radiopharmacy Posters

  • Resazurin as System Suitability Indicator for Radio-TLC Analysis of [18F] Fludeoxyglucose
  • The Shortage of Approved 68Ge/68Ga Generators - Incoming Material Inspection and GMP Compliant Use of Non-Approved Generators
  • [18F]FBQ-C2 as a metabolically stable glutamine derivative for cancer imaging
Show more Radiopharmacy Posters

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire