FDG PET/CT parameters and correlations with tumor-absorbed doses in a phase 1 trial of 177Lu-lilotomab satetraxetan for treatment of relapsed non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Purpose 177Lu-lilotomab satetraxetan targets the CD37 antigen and has been investigated in a first-in-human phase 1/2a study for relapsed non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Tumor dosimetry and response evaluation can be challenging after radioimmunotherapy (RIT). Changes in FDG PET/CT parameters after RIT and correlations with tumor-absorbed doses has not been examined previously in patients with lymphoma. Treatment-induced changes were measured at FDG PET/CT and ceCT to evaluate response at the lesion level after treatment, and correlations with tumor-absorbed doses were investigated. Methods Forty-five tumors in 16 patients, with different pre-treatment and pre-dosing regimens, were included. Dosimetry was performed based on multiple SPECT/CT images. FDG PET/CT was performed at baseline and at 3 and 6 months. SUVmax, MTV, TLG, and changes in these parameters were calculated for each tumor. Lesion response was evaluated at 3 and 6 months (PET3months and PET6months) based on Deauville criteria. Anatomical changes based on ceCT at baseline and at 6 and 12 months were investigated by the sum of perpendiculars (SPD). Results Tumor-absorbed doses ranged from 35 to 859 cGy. Intra- and interpatient variations were observed. Mean decreases in PET parameters from baseline to 3 months were ΔSUVmax-3months 61%, ΔMTV3months 80%, and ΔTLG3months 77%. There was no overall correlation between tumor-absorbed dose and change in FDG PET or ceCT parameters at the lesion level or significant difference in tumor-absorbed doses between metabolic responders and non-responders after treatment. Conclusion Our analysis does not show any correlation between tumor-absorbed doses and changes in FDG PET or ceCT parameters for the included lesions. The combination regimen, including cold antibodies, may be one of the factors precluding such a correlation. Increased intra-patient response with increased tumor-absorbed doses was observed for most patients, implying individual variations in radiation sensitivity or biology