[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Sm-153 advise?
We have experience using both Sr-89 and Sm-153. Consensus of most nuclear
medicine physicians seems to be that both therapies are equally efficacious.
1. I read through the online discussion (link is below) and found it well
done.
a. Keep in mind that you will need to determine a calibration
number for your particular dose calibrator. This number will vary even if
you use the same make and model referenced in the discussion. Dupont will
send a calibration source and instructions free of charge.
b. We utilize a 3-way stopcock to backflush residual activity in
the syringe. The clamping method referenced in the discussion also seems
very appropriate.
2. Using Sm-153 is a little more logistically demanding since it must
remain frozen until shortly before use and is shipped on dry ice.
3. For Sr-89, most patients receive a standard dose of 4 mCi. For Sm-153,
recommended dose is 1 mCi per kg.
4. Neither radiopharmaceutical requires dose rate determination for patient
release. NRC Reg Guide 8.39, table 1, allows unrestricted release for all
amounts of Sr-89 administered and up to 700 mCi of Sm-153. NRC Reg Guide
8.39, table 2, states that patient instructions (to reduce radiation
exposure to the general public) must be provided for Sm-153 dosages above
140 mCi. This regulatory guide may be downloaded from the NRC website.
5. Excellent information (package insert, dosage guide, patient
instructions, administration hints, technical data sheet) may be download
from Dupont's Quadramet website:
http://www.quadramet.com/
Sincerely,
Mark D. Krueger, RPh, BCNP
CPT, MS
United States Army
Clinical Nuclear Pharmacist
Dwight D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center
Fort Gordon, GA 30905-5650
phone: (706) 787-2196
FAX: (706) 787-2181
E-mail: mark.krueger@se.amedd.army.mil
Disclaimer:
The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the
author and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of
the US Department of the Army or the Department of Defense.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Lavely [mailto:lavelyp@uclink4.berkeley.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 7:00 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: Sm-153 advise?
Dr. Carol Marus wrote an excellent procedure and discussion that is online
at:
http://www.acnp-cal.org/SM153INS.html
Paul Lavely <lavelyp@uclink4.berkeley.edu>
> >Reply-To: Tyler Lembcke <physics@NLAMERICA.COM>
>>
>>Our oncologist has asked that I investigate adding Sm-153 to our rad mat
>>license. We currently use Sr-89. Can anyone with experience with Sm-153
>>tell me if there are any pitfalls of which I should be aware? Are the
>>release criteria different from Sr-89? How long do we have after
>>administration to perform the bone scan. No doubt our local nuc med dept
has
>>not done one of these, so what do they need to know?
>>
>>TIA
>>Tyler
>>
>>Tyler M. Lembcke, MS, DABMP
>>Oconee Regional Cancer Center
>>2406 Bellevue Ave, Ste 7
>>Dublin, GA 31021
>>(912)272-2255
>>(912)275-9134 Fax
>>physics@nlamerica.com
>************************************************************************
>The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
>information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html