Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

uu.sePublications from Uppsala University
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rethinking Dosimetry: A European Perspective
Univ Hosp VVuerzburg, Dept Nucl Med, Wurzburg, Germany..
Magna Graecia Univ Catanzaro, Dept Expt & Clin Med, Nucl Med Unit, Catanzaro, Italy..
Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Imaging & Pathol, Nucl Med & Mol Imaging, Leuven, Belgium..
IAEA, Nucl Med & Diagnost Imaging Sect, Vienna, Austria.;Ctr Leon Berard, Serv Med Nucl, Lyon, France..
Show others and affiliations
2025 (English)In: Journal of Nuclear Medicine, ISSN 0161-5505, E-ISSN 1535-5667, Vol. 66, no 9, p. 1323-1330Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) is entering a new era of personali-zation, driven by advances in molecular imaging, radiopharmaceutical development, and a growing body of clinical evidence linking absorbed dose to treatment outcomes. Although external-beam radio-therapy has long integrated dosimetry into standard practice, RPT his-torically relied on fixed radiopharmaceutical activities and absorbed dose-effect relationships adapted from external-beam radiotherapy, often without accounting for the unique pharmacokinetics, absorbed dose rate dynamics, and biologic responses of systemically adminis-tered radiopharmaceuticals. As RPT expands into earlier disease stages, at which patients have longer life expectancies and better per-formance status, the role of dosimetry in optimizing treatment is becoming increasingly evident. However, despite growing recognition of its benefits, the implementation of dosimetry in clinical practice remains limited, partly because of a self-reinforcing cycle in which the lack of routine dosimetry limits clinical evidence, which in turn hinders its broader adoption. Breaking this cycle is essential to advancing RPT and ensuring that evaluation of dosimetry is based on clinical merit rather than logistic constraints. This article examines the current landscape of RPT dosimetry, highlighting key challenges and opportu-nities from a European perspective and aiming to foster a more factual and constructive discussion on the topic. We discuss the fun-damental differences between dosimetry-driven treatment planning and posttherapy absorbed dose verification, emphasizing the latter as a practical entry point for clinical adoption. We underscore the need for harmonized standards, improved imaging resolution, and tailored absorbed dose-effect relationships that reflect the heterogeneity of RPT delivery and the complexity of tumor and organ responses. The paper also addresses regulatory, infrastructural, and resource barriers to RPT dosimetry implementation and highlights ongoing European initiatives to strengthen frameworks, enhance stakeholder collabora-tion, and integrate absorbed dose biomarkers into authorization pro-cesses and clinical decision-making. By rethinking dosimetry and promoting standardized, evidence-based approaches, the field can advance beyond fixed-activity protocols toward truly individualized RPT. However, achieving clinically feasible integration of dosimetry into routine practice requires structured efforts to generate high-quality clin-ical evidence and improve accessibility. Ultimately, reliable, patient-centered dosimetry has the potential to enhance therapeutic efficacy, manage toxicity more effectively, and support the long-term evolution of RPT as a cornerstone of precision oncology.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Society of Nuclear Medicine , 2025. Vol. 66, no 9, p. 1323-1330
Keywords [en]
absorbed dose, dosimetry, molecular radiotherapy, MRT, radionuclide therapy, radiopharmaceutical therapy
National Category
Radiology and Medical Imaging Cancer and Oncology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-568696DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.124.269378ISI: 001567701600002PubMedID: 40404395Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-105015793976OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-568696DiVA, id: diva2:2004941
Available from: 2025-10-08 Created: 2025-10-08 Last updated: 2025-10-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Sandström, MattiasGarske Roman, Ulrike

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wadsley, JonathanSandström, MattiasGarske Roman, Ulrike
By organisation
Radiology
In the same journal
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Radiology and Medical ImagingCancer and Oncology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 34 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf