Whole-Body Distribution and Radiation Dosimetry of <sup>11</sup>C-(+)-PHNO, a D<sub>2/3</sub> Agonist Ligand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Using PET, we measured the whole-body distribution of (11)C-(+)-PHNO ((11)C-(+)-4-propyl-9-hydroxynaphthoxazine), a D(2/3) agonist, as a function of time in adult subjects in order to determine the internal radiation dose. METHODS: PET whole-body data were acquired after the injection of (11)C-(+)-PHNO (∼360 MBq) in 6 healthy subjects (3 male and 3 female). The PET acquisition duration was a maximum of 112.5 min, and 9 discrete time frames were obtained. After reconstruction of the emission data, 6 organs were identified in the images as exhibiting uptake above background levels. Regions of interest were delineated on these organs, and time-activity curves were generated. The time-activity curve data were corrected for the injected activity, specific organ density, and volume, from which normalized accumulated activities (previously known as residence times) were calculated. The normalized accumulated activities were then used with the software code OLINDA/EXM 1.1 to calculate the internal doses for the standard adult male and female models. RESULTS: The mean effective dose was estimated to be 4.5 ± 0.3 μSv/MBq when all subjects were included and the male model was applied for the dosimetry calculation, and the mean effective dose was estimated to be 5.2 ± 0.2 μSv/MBq when the females were considered separately and the female model was applied for the calculation. The organ receiving the highest dose was the liver (17.9 ± 3.9 μSv/MBq), followed by the kidneys (14.3 ± 3.6 μSv/MBq) and the urinary bladder wall (13.5 ± 3.7 μSv/MBq). CONCLUSION: The estimated radiation doses for (11)C-(+)-PHNO are similar to those reported for other radiotracers labeled with (11)C. (11)C-(+)-PHNO may be used for multiple PET scans in the same subject and remain within regulatory guidelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".