Preclinical model reveals absorbed doses remain consistent in mCRPC with digital twins, indicating reliability amid measurement uncertainty.
Background/Objectives: Accurate absorbed dose estimation is essential for optimising targeted radionuclide therapy (TRT) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, where kidney toxicity is dose-limiting. [177Lu]Lu-rhPSMA-10.1 is a novel PSMA-targeted radioligand with favourable tumour-to-kidney uptake ratios; however, inter-patient pharmacokinetic variability can lead to differences in organ and tumour absorbed doses under fixed-activity administration. Personalised dosimetry offers a means to address this variability. This work aims to create mouse PBPK model-based digital twins for [177Lu]Lu-rhPSMA-10.1 to test the model’s resistance to noise and evaluate its impact on accuracy and absorbed dose calculations. Methods: Five CB-17 SCID mice bearing LNCaP tumour xenografts received 2.6–3.1 MBq [177Lu]Lu-rhPSMA-10.1 intravenously. Biodistribution was assessed 24 h post-injection by organ weighing and gamma counting. The PBPK model, implemented in MATLAB SimBiology (R2023a), was fitted to individual biodistribution data using mouse-specific physiological parameters. Digital twins—combining the model with fitted parameters—were used to generate time–activity curves (TACs) for kidneys, tumours, and the whole body. Gaussian noise (σ = 0–0.35) was added to TACs to simulate measurement error. The model was refitted, and absorbed doses from time-integrated activities (TIAs) were compared to digital twin references. Results: The digital twin approach reproduced experimental data with physiologically plausible parameters. Absorbed dose estimates remained consistent and robust, deviating by <2.3% in kidneys and <1.0% in tumours. Conclusions: PBPK-based digital twins enable reliable, individualised dosimetry, even under substantial measurement uncertainty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Costa et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: