PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Kenneth J. Nichols AU - William Robeson AU - Miyuki Yoshida-Hay AU - Pat B. Zanzonico AU - Fritzgerald Leveque AU - Kuldeep K. Bhargava AU - Gene G. Tronco AU - Christopher J. Palestro TI - Alternative Means of Estimating <sup>131</sup>I Maximum Permissible Activity to Treat Thyroid Cancer AID - 10.2967/jnumed.117.192278 DP - 2017 Oct 01 TA - Journal of Nuclear Medicine PG - 1588--1595 VI - 58 IP - 10 4099 - http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/58/10/1588.short 4100 - http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/58/10/1588.full SO - J Nucl Med2017 Oct 01; 58 AB - To protect bone marrow from overirradiation, the maximum permissible activity (MPA) of 131I to treat thyroid cancer is that which limits the absorbed dose to blood (as a surrogate of marrow) to less than 200 cGy. The conventional approach (method 1) requires repeated γ-camera whole-body measurements along with blood samples. We sought to determine whether reliable MPA values can be obtained by simplified procedures. Methods: Data acquired over multiple time points were examined retrospectively for 65 thyroid cancer patients, referred to determine 131I uptake and MPA for initial treatment after thyroidectomy (n = 39), including 17 patients with compromised renal function and 22 patients with known (n = 16) or suspected (n = 6) metastases. The total absorbed dose to blood (DTotal) was the sum of mean whole-body γ-ray dose component (Dγ) from uncollimated γ-camera measurements and dose due to β emissions (Dβ) from blood samples. Method 2 estimated DTotal from Dβ alone, method 3 estimated DTotal from Dγ alone, and method 4 estimated DTotal from a single 48-h γ-camera measurement. MPA was computed as 200 cGy/DTotal for each DTotal estimate. Results: Method 2 had the strongest correlation with conventional method 1 (r = 0.98) and values similar to method 1 (21.0 ± 13.7 cGy/GBq vs. 21.0 ± 14.1 cGy/GBq, P = 0.11), whereas method 3 had a weaker (P = 0.001) correlation (r = 0.94) and method 4 had the weakest (P &lt; 0.0001) correlation (r = 0.69) and lower dose (16.3 ± 14.8 cGy/GBq, P &lt; 0.0001). Consequently, correlation with method 1 MPA was strongest for method 2 MPA (r = 0.99) and weakest for method 4 (r = 0. 75). Method 2 and method 1 values agreed equally well regardless of whether patients had been treated with 131I previously or had abnormal renal function. Conclusion: Because MPA based on blood measurements alone is comparable to MPA obtained with combined body counting and blood sampling, blood measurements alone are sufficient for determining MPA.