Outcome-driven dosimetry optimization for [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radiopharmaceutical therapy: proof of concept on single time point dosimetry optimization.

Hu, Jiaxi; Seifert, Robert; Gomes, Carlos Vinicius; Chen, Yizhou; Liu, Yibin; Jutidamrongphan, Warissara; Amon, Michelle; Wang, Jiahui et al. · Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging · 2026

retrospective_cohort · Level III

Where this comes from

Abstract

Internal dosimetry in radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) traditionally prioritizes methodological optimization driven by physical dose accuracy. However, even recommended multiple-time-point (MTP) dosimetry remains subject to uncertainties related to limited sampling schedules, pharmacokinetic, and curve-fitting modeling assumptions. In patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RPT, we explored an outcome-driven dosimetry optimization strategy by comparing MTP and single-time-point (STP) dosimetry, and identifying optimal time-points (TPs) for Hänscheid approximation based on therapy outcomes. Clinical and image data from 50 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Transient treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response were monitored following CTCAE v5.0 and PCWG3. Cycle-level mean absorbed doses (MTPD<sub>tox</sub>, and 1d-, 2d-, 3d-STPD<sub>tox</sub> based on single SPECT acquisitions at 1-, 2-, 3-day(s) p.i.) were computed for organs-at-risk and whole-body tumors. Additionally, cumulative absorbed doses (STPD<sub>cum</sub> & MTPD<sub>cum</sub>) were derived for whole-body tumors. Bone marrow STP dosimetry correlated significantly with anaemia grading (1d-STPD<sub>tox</sub>: Spearman's ρ=0.35;2d-STPD<sub>tox</sub>: Spearman's ρ=0.41; 3d-STPD<sub>tox</sub>: Spearman's ρ=0.46; all p<sub>adj</sub><0.001), aligning with MTPD<sub>tox</sub> (Spearman's ρ=0.43, p<0.001). Williams' F-test confirmed no significant difference in correlation strength between STPD<sub>tox</sub> & MTPD<sub>tox</sub> derived correlations at any TPs. For PSA response, both MTPD<sub>cum</sub> (Spearman's ρ=-0.26, p<sub>adj</sub><0.05) and STPD<sub>cum</sub> (1d-&2d-STPD<sub>cum</sub>: Spearman's ρ=-0.34, p<sub>adj</sub><0.001) showed significant correlations, without statistically significant differences between STPD<sub>cum</sub> & MTPD<sub>cum</sub> derived correlations. The outcome-driven TP selection for Hänscheid-based STP dosimetry converges with the physics-based choice within 2-day p.i., the clinically driven approach offers an alternative and complementary strategy for dosimetry development and may facilitate its translation into clinical practice.