Minimal Residual Disease: a Target for Radioimmunotherapy with 131I-labeled Monoclonal Antibodies? Some Dosimetric Considerations
Tumor size is one of the decisive parameters for the efficacy of conventional radiation therapy. From experimental and clinical data this seems also to be true for systemic radiotherapy, such as radioiodine therapy in thyroid cancer (Malone 1975) or radioimmunotherapy (RIT) with labeled monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) (Thedrez et al. 1989; Chatal et al. 1989) In general, it may be stated that the smaller the tumor size, the greater the chance of controlling it. However, for a very small tumor, the contrary may be the case in systemic radiotherapy: due to the limited range of the radionuclides used, a considerable proportion of the energy may be deposited outside the tumor and tumoricidal doses may not be achieved. Thus, in the situation of minimal residual disease (MRD) the chance of cure may be lessened.
KeywordsLymphoma Iodine Radionuclide Malone Berman
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Chatal JF, Saccavini JC, Gestin JE, Thedrez P, Curtet C, Kremer M, Guerreau D, Nobile D, Fumoleau P, Guillard Y (1989) Biodistribution of indium-111-labeled OC 125 monoclonal antibody intraperitoneally injected into patients operated on for ovarian carcinomas. Cancer Res 49: 3089–3094Google Scholar
- Ford RL, Nelson WR (1978) The EGS code system. National Technical Information Service, Springfeld (Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, report no 210 )Google Scholar
- ICRU (1979) Methods of assessment of absorbed dose in clinical use of radionuclides. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Washington (Report no 32 )Google Scholar
- Loevinger R, Berman MA (1968) Scheme for absorbed dose calculations for biologically distributed radionuclides. J Nucl Med 9 Suppl 1: 9–14Google Scholar
- Loevinger R, Berman MA (1976) A revised scheme for calculation and absorbed dose from biologically distributed radionuclides. New York: Society of Nuclear Medicine, New York tMIRD pamphlet, no 1Google Scholar
- Mach J-P, Buchegger F, Forni M, Ritschard J, Berche C, Lumbroso J-D, Schreyer M, Girardet C, Accola RS, Carrel S (1981) Use of radiolabeled monoclonal anti- CEA antibodies for the detection of human carcinomas by external photoscanning and tomoscintigraphy. Immunol Today 2: 239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nelson WR, Hirayama H, Rogers DWO (1985) The EGS4 code system. Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford (SLAC report 265 )Google Scholar
- Sullivan D, Siva JS, Cox CE, Haagensen DE, Harris CC, Briner WH, Wells SA (1982) Localisation of I-131-labeled goat and primate anti-carcinoembryonic antigen ( CEA) antibodies in patients with cancer. Invest Radiol 17: 350–355Google Scholar
- Thedrez P, Saccavini JC, Nobile D, Simoen JP, Guerreau D, Gestin JF, Curtet C, Kremer M, Chatal FF (1989) Biodistribution of indium-111-labeled OC125 monoclonal antibody after intraperitoneal injection in nude mice intraperitoneally grafted with ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res 49: 3081–3086PubMedGoogle Scholar