Prediction of Acute Radiation-Induced Lung Toxicity After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Using Dose-Volume Parameters From Functional Mapping on Gallium 68 Perfusion Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography.

PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to compare anatomic and functional dose-volume parameters as predictors of acute radiation-induced lung toxicity (RILT) in patients with lung tumors treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifty-nine patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy were prospectively included. All patients underwent gallium 68 lung perfusion positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) imaging before treatment. Mean lung dose (MLD) and volumes receiving x Gy (VxGy, 5-30 Gy) were calculated in 5 lung volumes: the conventional anatomic volume (AV) delineated on CT images, 3 lung functional volumes (FVs) defined on lung perfusion PET imaging (FV50%, FV70%, and FV90%; ie, the minimal volume containing 50%, 70%, and 90% of the total activity within the AV), and a low FV (LFV; LFV = AV - FV90%). The primary endpoint of this analysis was grade ≥2 acute RILT at 3 months as assessed with National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5. Dose-volume parameters in patients with and without acute RILT were compared. Receiver operating characteristic curves assessing the ability of dose-volume parameters to discriminate between patients with and without acute RILT were generated, and area under the curve (AUC) values were calculated. RESULTS: Of the 59 patients, 10 (17%) had grade ≥2 acute RILT. The MLD and the VxGy in the AV and LFV were not statistically different between patients with and without acute RILT (P > .05). All functional parameters were significantly higher in acute RILT patients (P < .05). AUC values (95% CI) for MLD AV, LFV, FV50%, FV70%, and FV90% were 0.66 (0.46-0.85), 0.60 (0.39-0.80), 0.77 (0.63-0.91), 0.77 (0.64-0.91), and 0.75 (0.58-0.91), respectively. AUC values for V20Gy AV, LFV, FV50%, FV70%, and FV90% were 0.65 (0.44-0.87), 0.64 (0.46-0.83), 0.82 (0.69-0.95), 0.81 (0.67-0.96), and 0.75 (0.57-0.94), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive value of PET perfusion-based functional parameters outperforms the standard CT-based dose-volume parameters for the risk of grade ≥2 acute RILT. Functional parameters could be useful for guiding radiation therapy planning and reducing the risk of acute RILT.

Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [18F]FDG PET and [68Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures.

Introduction: Ventilation/Perfusion (V/Q) PET/CT is an emerging imaging modality for regional lung function evaluation. The same carrier molecules as conventional V/Q scintigraphy are used but they are radiolabelled with gallium-68 (68Ga) instead of technetium-99m (99mTc). A recurrent concern regarding V/Q PET imaging is the radiation dose to the healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the total effective dose and the finger dose received by the technologist when performing a V/Q PET procedure, and to compare them with the radiations doses received with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, FDG PET and Ga DOTATOC PET procedures. Materials and methods: The whole body dose measurement was performed 10 times for each of the evaluated procedures using an electronic personal dosimeter (ED). For V/Q PET and V/Q scintigraphy procedures, ventilation and perfusion stages were separately evaluated. Internal exposure was measured for ventilation procedures. Finger dose measurements were performed 5 times for each of the PET procedures using Thermoluminescence (TL) pellets. Results: The technologist effective dose when performing a V/Q PET procedure was 2.83 ± 0.67 µSv, as compared with 1.16 ± 0.34 µSv for conventional V/Q scintigraphy, 2.13 ± 0.77 µSv for [68Ga]Ga-DOTATOC, and 2.86 ± 1.79 µSv for FDG PET procedures, respectively. The finger dose for the V/Q PET procedure was similar to the dose for a [68Ga]Ga-DOTATOC scan (0.35 mSv and 0.32 mSv, respectively). Conclusion: The technologist total effective dose for a V/Q PET procedure is ~2.4 higher than the dose for a conventional V/Q scintigraphy, but in the same range than the radiation exposure when performing common PET procedures, both in terms of total effective dose or finger dose. These results should be reassuring for the healthcare workers performing a V/Q PET procedure.