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
Research ArticleRadiobiology/Dosimetry

Comparative Dosimetry for 68Ga-DOTATATE: Impact of Using Updated ICRP Phantoms, S Values, and Tissue-Weighting Factors

Anders Josefsson, Robert F. Hobbs, Sagar Ranka, Bryan C. Schwarz, Donika Plyku, Jose Willegaignon de Amorim de Carvalho, Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel, Marcelo Tatit Sapienza, Wesley E. Bolch and George Sgouros
Journal of Nuclear Medicine August 2018, 59 (8) 1281-1288; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.203893
Anders Josefsson
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert F. Hobbs
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Maryland
2Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sagar Ranka
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bryan C. Schwarz
3Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Donika Plyku
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jose Willegaignon de Amorim de Carvalho
4Instituto do Cancer do Estado de São Paulo, School of Medicine, São Paulo University, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel
4Instituto do Cancer do Estado de São Paulo, School of Medicine, São Paulo University, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marcelo Tatit Sapienza
4Instituto do Cancer do Estado de São Paulo, School of Medicine, São Paulo University, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wesley E. Bolch
3Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
George Sgouros
1Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore Maryland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    Mean absorbed dose coefficients for normal organs and tissues using ICRP 110 phantoms. Error bars = SD.

  • FIGURE 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2.

    Absorbed dose coefficients for selected tissues from 16 patients using ICRP 110 phantoms.

  • FIGURE 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3.

    Comparison of absorbed dose coefficients for ICRP 110 phantoms, CE phantoms (CEP), and previously published results by Walker et al. (9) using OLINDA/EXM, version 1. Error bars = SD. *Anatomic definition differs between ICRP 110 and CE phantoms. +ICRP 110 phantoms show alveolar–interstitial absorbed dose coefficient, compared with total lung for CE phantoms.

  • FIGURE 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4.

    Contribution from target region, source region, and remainder of body to total absorbed dose coefficient in target regions ICRP 110 kidney (A), CE kidney (B), ICRP 110 urinary bladder wall (with contribution from contents and wall) (C), and CE urinary bladder wall (with contribution from contents) (D). CEP = CE phantoms.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Patient and Imaging Data

    PatientAge (y)Weight (kg)Height (cm)SexAdministered activity (MBq)PET/CT scans (n)
    1F5963155F156.93
    2F6775145F107.33
    3F7074147F140.64
    4F5366165F126.22
    5F3576161F107.33
    6F3862167F125.82
    7F65109159F82.13
    8M3683178M149.12
    9F7973156F177.63
    10M5968157M169.53
    11M63102182M158.73
    12M3985181M91.03
    13F4397155F112.12
    14M4494176M137.32
    15F52106162F126.53
    16F5884157F131.73
    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Absorbed Dose Coefficients for 68Ga-DOTATATE (mGy/MBq) in Normal Tissues and Organs

    SiteICRP 110CESandström et al. (10)Walker et al. (9)
    Spleen0.25 ± 0.0970.28 ± 0.110.11 ± 0.0580.28 ± 0.12
    Pituitary gland0.15 ± 0.0620.22 ± 0.092—0.042 ± 0.032
    Kidneys0.14 ± 0.0480.15 ± 0.0550.093 ± 0.0160.092 ± 0.028
    Adrenal glands0.11 ± 0.0370.11 ± 0.0410.086 ± 0.0520.015 ± 0.001
    Liver0.084 ± 0.0190.088 ± 0.0220.050 ± 0.0150.045 ± 0.015
    Gallbladder wall0.043 ± 0.0080.015 ± 0.0020.016 ± 0.0020.015 ± 0.001
    Urinary bladder wall0.040 ± 0.0110.090 ± 0.0330.098 ± 0.0480.13 ± 0.062
    Effective dose coefficient (mSv/MBq)0.023 ± 0.0030.027 ± 0.0050.021 ± 0.0030.026 ± 0.003
    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    Average TIACs (h) in Normal Tissues and Organs

    MaleFemale
    SiteICRP 110CEICRP 110CE
    Whole body1.48E+00 ± 5.67E−021.48E+00 ± 5.67E−021.48E+00 ± 9.77E−021.48E+00 ± 9.77E−02
    Remainder of body4.98E−01 ± 8.01E−026.49E−01 ± 6.28E−025.17E−01 ± 6.95E−026.01E−01 ± 7.63E−02
    Muscle3.17E−01 ± 8.14E−022.95E−01 ± 7.58E−022.11E−01 ± 7.34E−022.29E−01 ± 5.23E−02
    Liver2.90E−01 ± 4.89E−022.32E−01 ± 3.92E−023.18E−01 ± 5.48E−022.59E−01 ± 4.47E−02
    Kidneys8.56E−02 ± 7.97E−036.00E−02 ± 5.59E−031.25E−01 ± 3.35E−021.01E−01 ± 2.72E−02
    Spleen9.54E−02 ± 2.32E−027.59E−02 ± 1.84E−021.22E−01 ± 4.20E−021.03E−01 ± 3.55E−02
    Lungs6.78E−02 ± 1.39E−025.60E−02 ± 1.15E−025.98E−02 ± 1.97E−025.31E−02 ± 1.75E−02
    Urinary bladder contents6.07E−02 ± 1.92E−026.07E−02 ± 1.92E−025.76E−02 ± 2.16E−025.76E−02 ± 2.16E−02
    Red marrow4.47E−02 ± 2.41E−023.56E−02 ± 1.92E−024.59E−02 ± 2.36E−025.91E−02 ± 3.03E−02
    Heart wall8.59E−03 ± 1.54E−036.97E−03 ± 1.25E−037.48E−03 ± 1.83E−036.50E−03 ± 1.59E−03
    Salivary glands3.39E−03 ± 9.17E−04—4.87E−03 ± 1.91E−03—
    Brain4.26E−03 ± 5.30E−043.95E−03 ± 4.91E−046.10E−03 ± 1.36E−035.72E−03 ± 1.27E−03
    Adrenal glands2.91E−03 ± 3.55E−042.72E−03 ± 3.32E−043.88E−03 ± 1.41E−033.69E−03 ± 1.34E−03
    Testes7.60E−04 ± 1.07E−047.91E−04 ± 1.11E−04——
    Thyroid6.86E−04 ± 3.10E−046.01E−04 ± 2.72E−044.64E−04 ± 1.68E−044.26E−04 ± 1.54E−04
    Pituitary gland2.71E−04 ± 6.96E−052.68E−04 ± 6.90E−054.49E−04 ± 1.49E−044.73E−04 ± 1.58E−04
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 59 (8)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 59, Issue 8
August 1, 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
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.
Comparative Dosimetry for 68Ga-DOTATATE: Impact of Using Updated ICRP Phantoms, S Values, and Tissue-Weighting Factors
(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
Comparative Dosimetry for 68Ga-DOTATATE: Impact of Using Updated ICRP Phantoms, S Values, and Tissue-Weighting Factors
Anders Josefsson, Robert F. Hobbs, Sagar Ranka, Bryan C. Schwarz, Donika Plyku, Jose Willegaignon de Amorim de Carvalho, Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel, Marcelo Tatit Sapienza, Wesley E. Bolch, George Sgouros
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Aug 2018, 59 (8) 1281-1288; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.117.203893

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Comparative Dosimetry for 68Ga-DOTATATE: Impact of Using Updated ICRP Phantoms, S Values, and Tissue-Weighting Factors
Anders Josefsson, Robert F. Hobbs, Sagar Ranka, Bryan C. Schwarz, Donika Plyku, Jose Willegaignon de Amorim de Carvalho, Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel, Marcelo Tatit Sapienza, Wesley E. Bolch, George Sgouros
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Aug 2018, 59 (8) 1281-1288; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.117.203893
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Radiobiology/Dosimetry

  • Feasibility of Single-Time-Point Dosimetry for Radiopharmaceutical Therapies
  • γ-Tocotrienol–Loaded Liposomes for Radioprotection from Hematopoietic Side Effects Caused by Radiotherapeutic Drugs
  • Dose–Effect Relationships of 166Ho Radioembolization in Colorectal Cancer
Show more Radiobiology/Dosimetry

Clinical

  • Feasibility of Single-Time-Point Dosimetry for Radiopharmaceutical Therapies
  • γ-Tocotrienol–Loaded Liposomes for Radioprotection from Hematopoietic Side Effects Caused by Radiotherapeutic Drugs
  • Dose–Effect Relationships of 166Ho Radioembolization in Colorectal Cancer
Show more Clinical

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • 68Ga-DOTATATE
  • PET/CT imaging
  • normal tissue
  • dosimetry
  • effective dose
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire