Modelling Potential Candidates for Targeted Auger Therapy

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, the authors report the determination the most DNA-damaging Auger emitters from a variety of radionuclides based on Gean4-DNA software. Overall, the study is interesting, and the manuscript can be accepted for publication after addressing the following minor concerns.

1)      64Cu is also an Auger emitter with high clinical use. It would be important to include it in this study.

2)       It would be helpful to discuss the limitation of Auger emitters for radionuclide treatment in the discussion section.

Author Response

Thank you for your helpful suggestions: 

1)  64Cu is also an Auger emitter with high clinical use. It would be important to include it in this study.

A modelling analysis of 64Cu has now carried out and included in the study

  2)       It would be helpful to discuss the limitation of Auger emitters for radionuclide treatment in the discussion section.

The limitation of Augers is now included (discussion, paragraph 1)

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

p.3 line 89 - 103Pd not decaying to a long- lived daughter. 103mRh has 56 min.

The article presents interesting calculations of DNA damage induced by selected radionuclides (119Sb, 193mPt, 195mPt, 103Pd, 197Hg and 116Tb), which were simulated using the Geant4-DNA package. The work is interesting and provides very important information about the usefulness of the proposed radionuclides in therapy with conversion electrons and Auger electrons. Unfortunately, I do not know the Geant4-DNA package used for the calculations and I cannot assess their correctness. I found a few errors in the work that should be explained and corrected.

p. line 103 89Zr is for PET, not for SPECT

Table 1. In table Auger electrons for 103Pd is mentioned. But you should add also Auger electrons from daughter 103mRh

Table 1. It should be mentioned that Auger electrons are not emitted by 89Zr but 89mY (t1/2=15 s)

 

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your helpful review 

1) p. line 103 89Zr is for PET, not for SPECT
Thank you - this was an oversight which we have now corrected

Table 1. In table Auger electrons for 103Pd is mentioned. But you should add also Auger electrons from daughter 103mRh

103mRh is now included in table 1

Table 1. It should be mentioned that Auger electrons are not emitted by 89Zr but 89mY (t1/2=15 s)

We have now stated 'In the case of ⁸⁹Zr, which is currently used in PET due to its β⁺ emission, the electron capture decay to the very short-lived daughter ^89mY (t=15.633s) decaying to produce Augers.....