Paper detail

Validation of Monte Carlo Iodine-131 radiopharmaceutical dosimetry workflow using a 3D printed anthropomorphic head and neck phantom

Purpose: In this study, we present the creation of an anthropomorphic, head and neck, nuclear medicine phantom and its characterization for the validation of a Monte Carlo, SPECT image based, Iodine-131 RPT dosimetry workflow. Methods: 3D printing techniques were used to create the anthropomorphic phantom from a patient CT dataset. Three Iodine-131 SPECT/CT imaging studies were performed using a homogeneous, Jaszczak, and an anthropomorphic phantom to quantify the SPECT images. The impact of collimator detector response (CDR) modeling and volume-based partial volume corrections (PVC) upon the absorbed dose was calculated using an image based, Geant4 Monte Carlo RPT dosimetry workflow and compared against a ground truth scenario. Finally, uncertainties were quantified in accordance with recent EANM guidelines. Results: The 3D printed anthropomorphic phantom was an accurate re-creation of patient anatomy including bone. The extrapolated Jaszczak recovery coefficients were greater than that of the 3D printed insert (~22.8 ml) for both the CDR and non-CDR cases. Utilizing Jaszczak phantom PVCs, the absorbed dose was underpredicted by 0.7% and 4.9% without and with CDR, respectively. Utilizing anthropomorphic phantom RCs overpredicted the absorbed dose by 3% both with and without CDR. All dosimetry scenarios that incorporated PVC were within the calculated uncertainty of the activity. The uncertainties in the cumulative activity ranged from 25.6% to 113% for Jaszczak spheres ranging in volume from 0.5 ml to 16 ml. Conclusion: The accuracy of Monte Carlo-based dosimetry for Iodine-131 RPT in head and neck cancer was validated with an anthropomorphic phantom. Future applications of the phantom could involve 3D printing and characterizing patient specific volumes for more personalized RPT dosimetry estimates.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.