MIRD Pamphlet No. 28, Part 2: Comparative Evaluation of MIRDcalc Dosimetry Software Across a Compendium of Diagnostic Radiopharmaceuticals.

Radiopharmaceutical dosimetry is usually estimated via organ-level MIRD schema-style formalisms, which form the computational basis for commonly used clinical and research dosimetry software. Recently, MIRDcalc internal dosimetry software was developed to provide a freely available organ-level dosimetry solution that incorporates up-to-date models of human anatomy, addresses uncertainty in radiopharmaceutical biokinetics and patient organ masses, and offers a 1-screen user interface as well as quality assurance tools. The present work describes the validation of MIRDcalc and, secondarily, provides a compendium of radiopharmaceutical dose coefficients obtained with MIRDcalc. Biokinetic data for about 70 currently and historically used radiopharmaceuticals were obtained from the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) publication 128 radiopharmaceutical data compendium. Absorbed dose and effective dose coefficients were derived from the biokinetic datasets using MIRDcalc, IDAC-Dose, and OLINDA software. The dose coefficients obtained with MIRDcalc were systematically compared against the other software-derived dose coefficients and those originally presented in ICRP publication 128. Dose coefficients computed with MIRDcalc and IDAC-Dose showed excellent overall agreement. The dose coefficients derived from other software and the dose coefficients promulgated in ICRP publication 128 both were in reasonable agreement with the dose coefficients computed with MIRDcalc. Future work should expand the scope of the validation to include personalized dosimetry calculations.

MIRD Pamphlet No. 28, Part 1: MIRDcalc-A Software Tool for Medical Internal Radiation Dosimetry.

Medical internal radiation dosimetry constitutes a fundamental aspect of diagnosis, treatment, optimization, and safety in nuclear medicine. The MIRD committee of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging developed a new computational tool to support organ-level and suborgan tissue dosimetry (MIRDcalc, version 1). Based on a standard Excel spreadsheet platform, MIRDcalc provides enhanced capabilities to facilitate radiopharmaceutical internal dosimetry. This new computational tool implements the well-established MIRD schema for internal dosimetry. The spreadsheet incorporates a significantly enhanced database comprising details for 333 radionuclides, 12 phantom reference models (International Commission on Radiological Protection), 81 source regions, and 48 target regions, along with the ability to interpolate between models for patient-specific dosimetry. The software also includes sphere models of various composition for tumor dosimetry. MIRDcalc offers several noteworthy features for organ-level dosimetry, including modeling of blood source regions and dynamic source regions defined by user input, integration of tumor tissues, error propagation, quality control checks, batch processing, and report-preparation capabilities. MIRDcalc implements an immediate, easy-to-use single-screen interface. The MIRDcalc software is available for free download (www.mirdsoft.org) and has been approved by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

The helically-acquired CTDIvol as an alternative to traditional methodology.

PURPOSE: Most clinical computed tomography (CT) protocols use helical scanning; however, the traditional method for CTDIvol measurement replaces the helical protocol with an axial scan, which is not easily accomplished on many scanners and may lead to unmatched collimation settings and bowtie filters. This study assesses whether CTDIvol can be accurately measured with a helical scan and determines the impact of pitch, collimation width, and excess scan length. METHODS: CTDIvol was measured for 95 helical protocols on 31 CT scanners from all major manufacturers. CTDIvol was measured axially, then again helically, with the scan range set to the active area of the pencil chamber seen on the localizer image. CTDIvol measurements using each method were compared to each other and to the scanner-displayed CTDIvol . To test the impact of scan length, the study was repeated on four scanners, with the scan range set to the phantom borders seen on the localizer. RESULTS: It was not possible to match the collimation width between the axial and helical modes for 12 of the 95 protocols tested. For helical and axial protocols with matched collimation, the difference between the two methods averaged below 1 mGy with a correlation of R2  = 0.99. The difference between the methods was not statistically significant (P = 0.81). The traditional method produced four measurements that differed from the displayed CTDIvol by >20%; no helical measurements did. The accuracy of the helical CTDIvol was independent of protocol pitch (R2  = 0.0) or collimation (R2  = 0.0). Extending the scan range to the phantom borders increased the measured CTDIvol by 2.1%-9.7%. CONCLUSION: There was excellent agreement between the two measurement methods and to the displayed CTDIvol , without protocol or vendor dependence. The helical CTDIvol measurement can be accomplished more easily than the axial method on many scanners and is reasonable to use for QC purposes.