Quantifying the radiation dosage to individual skeletal lesions treated with samarium-153-EDTMP

Abstract

Samarium-153ethylenediaminetetramethylenephosphonate (EDTMP) is used in the treatment of painful skeletal lesions. This study attempted to quantify the radiation dosage to individual lesions on both the macroscopic and microscopic level.

Methods: A gamma camera-based quantification technique was adapted and refined for 153Sm. The accuracy of the technique was determined by using a realistic phantom. The activity and volume of lesions as well as normal bone were determined and used to estimate the radiation dosages to these regions. Two patients died of unrelated causes shortly after receiving 153Sm-EDTMP. This made it possible to compare the gamma camera results with direct measurements. It also allowed for autoradiographic examination of the lesions. Finally, the microscopic radiation dosages were estimated.

Results: The phantom study indicated that the quantification technique was off, on average, by 4.1% (s.d. = 8.1%). The absolute activity concentration of trabecular bone was found to be approximately 0.22 MBq/g, and that of cortical bone was found to be approximately 0.1 MBq/g, regardless of the dosage administered. The corresponding concentrations for lesions were between 3 and 7 times higher than that of normal bone, with no apparent ceiling. From these results, the macroscopic radiation dosage could be estimated. The dosage to normal bone varied between 0.9 and 3.9 cGy x kg/MBq, and that of the lesions varied between 5.2 and 27.1 cGy x kg/MBq. The autopsy results confirmed that the gamma camera technique was accurate. The autoradiography showed clearly that the activity was associated with the surface of the bone. From these findings, the microscopic radiation dosage distribution was estimated for cortical and trabecular bone as well as osteoblastic lesions. The variation in the microscopic dosage compared to the macroscopic dosage was quite large. Microscopic dosages, when compared to the macroscopic dosages, were as high as 965% and as low as 14.9%.

Conclusion: The techniques used have been proven to be accurate. The activity in normal bone may be at a ceiling value for all the administered doses, which could explain the small variation. This is not true for the lesions. The large variation in dosages on a microscopic scale, combined with the ceiling in normal bone, may explain the lower than expected toxicity and relatively quick relapse of the patients.