The Accomplishments and Legacy of Saul Hertz, MD.

The early history of the use of radioactive iodine (RAI) is complicated and interesting, and also difficult to discover, especially since several histories have presented inaccurate content. This article is a comprehensive review of the accomplishments of Saul Hertz. Extensive use of primary-source verification has clarified several issues, including the question of whether Hertz alone conceived and asked the pivotal question: "Could iodine be made radioactive artificially?"; on what date RAI was first used to treat hyperthyroidism; and why 2 articles on the first use of RAI for treatment of hyperthyroidism, from 2 different sets of authors from the same department of the same institution, appeared adjacent to each other in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1946. Our review also chronicles several major challenges that Hertz overcame to produce his pivotal work. Hertz was clearly the originator and a visionary of RAI therapy in benign and malignant thyroid disease. We believe he can be considered one of the fathers of nuclear medicine. Hertz's paradigm-changing work was a pivotal medical discovery of the 20th century. The legacy of Hertz continues while the application of RAI therapy continues to evolve. RAI therapy remains the preferred treatment in most situations for autonomous nodules and toxic multinodular goiter and remains a safe and effective treatment for Graves disease after more than 80 y of global clinical use. RAI treatment of differentiated thyroid cancer remains a first-line treatment for most patients after surgery, especially for those with intermediate- or high-risk disease.

A Joint Statement from the American Thyroid Association, the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, the European Thyroid Association, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging on Current Diagnostic and Theranostic Approaches in the Management of Thyroid Cancer.

Background: The American Thyroid Association (ATA), the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, the European Thyroid Association, and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging have established an intersocietal working group to address the current controversies and evolving concepts in thyroid cancer management and therapy. The working group annually identifies topics that may significantly impact clinical practice and publishes expert opinion articles reflecting intersocietal collaboration, consensus, and suggestions for further research to address these important management issues. Summary: In 2019, the intersocietal working group identified the following topics for review and interdisciplinary discussion: (i) perioperative risk stratification, (ii) the role of diagnostic radioactive iodine (RAI) imaging in initial staging, and (iii) indicators of response to RAI therapy. Conclusions: The intersocietal working group agreed that (i) initial patient management decisions should be guided by perioperative risk stratification that should include the eighth edition American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system to predict disease specific mortality, the modified 2009 ATA risk stratification system to estimate structural disease recurrence, with judicious incorporation of molecular theranostics to further refine management recommendations; (ii) diagnostic RAI scanning in ATA intermediate risk patients should be utilized selectively rather than being considered mandatory or not necessary for all patients in this category; and (iii) a consistent semiquantitative reporting system should be used for response evaluations after RAI therapy until a reproducible and clinically practical quantitative system is validated.

A Critical Assessment of the Linear No-Threshold Hypothesis: Its Validity and Applicability for Use in Risk Assessment and Radiation Protection.

The Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging convened a task group to examine the evidence for the risk of carcinogenesis from low-dose radiation exposure and to assess evidence in the scientific literature related to the overall validity of the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis and its applicability for use in risk assessment and radiation protection. In the low-dose and dose-rate region, the group concluded that the LNT hypothesis is invalid as it is not supported by the available scientific evidence and, instead, is actually refuted by published epidemiology and radiation biology. The task group concluded that the evidence does not support the use of LNT either for risk assessment or radiation protection in the low-dose and dose-rate region.

Controversies, Consensus, and Collaboration in the Use of 131I Therapy in Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: A Joint Statement from the American Thyroid Association, the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and the European Thyroid Association.

BACKGROUND: Publication of the 2015 American Thyroid Association (ATA) management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer was met with disagreement by the extended nuclear medicine community with regard to some of the recommendations related to the diagnostic and therapeutic use of radioiodine (131I). Because of these concerns, the European Association of Nuclear Medicine and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging declined to endorse the ATA guidelines. As a result of these differences in opinion, patients and clinicians risk receiving conflicting advice with regard to several key thyroid cancer management issues. SUMMARY: To address some of the differences in opinion and controversies associated with the therapeutic uses of 131I in differentiated thyroid cancer constructively, the ATA, the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and the European Thyroid Association each sent senior leadership and subject-matter experts to a two-day interactive meeting. The goals of this first meeting were to (i) formalize the dialogue and activities between the four societies; (ii) discuss indications for 131I adjuvant treatment; (iii) define the optimal prescribed activity of 131I for adjuvant treatment; and (iv) clarify the definition and classification of 131I-refractory thyroid cancer. CONCLUSION: By fostering an open, productive, and evidence-based discussion, the Martinique meeting restored trust, confidence, and a sense of collegiality between individuals and organizations that are committed to optimal thyroid disease management. The result of this first meeting is a set of nine principles (The Martinique Principles) that (i) describe a commitment to proactive, purposeful, and inclusive interdisciplinary cooperation; (ii) define the goals of 131I therapy as remnant ablation, adjuvant treatment, or treatment of known disease; (iii) describe the importance of evaluating postoperative disease status and multiple other factors beyond clinicopathologic staging in 131I therapy decision making; (iv) recognize that the optimal administered activity of 131I adjuvant treatment cannot be definitely determined from the published literature; and (v) acknowledge that current definitions of 131I-refractory disease are suboptimal and do not represent definitive criteria to mandate whether 131I therapy should be recommended.

Management of Diabetes Mellitus Before 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT: A Nationwide Patient-Centered Assessment of Approaches to Examination Preparation.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to perform, from the patient's point of view, a nationwide assessment of nuclear medicine practices regarding diabetic management before 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT for oncologic indications. METHODS: This prospective observational study was exempt from institutional review board oversight. Sixty-five nuclear medicine scheduling lines (33 academic, 32 private practice, 12-17 in each of the five US regions) were called using a prewritten script under the guise of a nonexpert patient's family member about scheduling a patient with diabetes with "cancer" for FDG PET/CT. Each center was called three times on three different days. The following data were collected: (1) blood glucose threshold for rescheduling an examination, (2) when or if to stop various medications, (3) fasting requirements, and (4) time-of-day scheduling preferences. Withheld information was not specifically requested. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: There were 195 phone calls (mean duration, 2.9 min; range, 2-6 min). Relevant information was often withheld; withholding rates were as follows: blood glucose threshold, 71% (138 of 195); short-acting insulin instructions, 30% (59 of 195); long-acting insulin instructions, 99% (193 of 195); metformin instructions, 88% (179 of 195); fasting duration, 37% (72 of 195); and time-of-day scheduling preference, 91% (177 of 195). Mean provided data were as follows: blood glucose threshold, 195 mg/dL (range, 150-210 mg/dL); short-acting insulin withholding, 4.9 hours (range, 4-8 hours); long-acting insulin withholding, 12 hours (range, 12-24 hours); fasting duration, 5 hours (range, 4-8 hours); and preferred examination time, 91% (177 of 195). When specified (n = 18), morning scheduling was preferred (8% [15 of 195] versus 2% [3 of 195]). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes-specific information is commonly withheld by nuclear medicine call centers throughout the United States when discussing oncologic FDG PET/CT despite local and national policies indicating its importance.