Safety of gadoxetate disodium: Results from the clinical phase II-III development program and postmarketing surveillance

Comparison of the Ability of Gadobenate Dimeglumine and Gadolinium Ethoxybenzyl Dimeglumine to Display the major Features for Noninvasively Diagnosing Hepatocellular Carcinoma According to the LI-RADS 2018v

OBJECTIVE

To compare the ability of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl dimeglumine (Gd-EOB-DTPA) and gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) to display the 3 major features recommended by the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS 2018v) for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included 98 HCC lesions that were scanned with either Gd-EOB-DTPA-MR or Gd-BOPTA-M.For each lesion, we collected multiple variables, including size and enhancement pattern in the arterial phase (AP), portal venous phase (PVP), transitional phase (TP), delayed phase (DP), and hepatobiliary phase (HBP). The lesion-to-liver contrast (LLC) was measured and calculated for each phase and then compared between the 2 contrast agents. A P value < .05 was considered statistically significant. The display efficiency of the LLC between Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA for HCC features was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS

Between Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA, significant differences were observed regarding the display efficiency for capsule enhancement and the LLC in the AP/PVP/DP (P < .05), but there was no significant difference regarding the LLC in the TP/HBP. Both Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA had good display efficiency in each phase (AUCmin > 0.750). When conducting a total evaluation of the combined data across the 5 phases, the display efficiency was excellent (AUC > 0.950).

CONCLUSION

Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA are liver-specific contrast agents widely used in clinical practice. They have their own characteristics in displaying the 3 main signs of HCC. For accurate noninvasive diagnosis, the choice of agent should be made according to the specific situation.

Gadoxetate-Enhanced MRI as a Diagnostic Tool in the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Report from a 2020 Asia-Pacific Multidisciplinary Expert Meeting

Gadoxetate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is widely used in clinical practice for liver imaging. For optimal use, we must understand both its advantages and limitations. This article is the outcome of an online advisory board meeting and subsequent discussions by a multidisciplinary group of experts on liver diseases across the Asia-Pacific region, first held on September 28, 2020. Here, we review the technical considerations for the use of gadoxetate, its current role in the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and its relevance in consensus guidelines for HCC imaging diagnosis. In the latter part of this review, we examine recent evidence evaluating the impact of gadoxetate on clinical outcomes on a continuum from diagnosis to treatment decision-making and follow-up. In conclusion, we outline the potential future roles of gadoxetate MRI based on an evolving understanding of the clinical utility of this contrast agent in the management of patients at risk of, or with, HCC.

Superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MRI-guided stereotactic ablative radiation therapy for liver metastasis

Background

MRI-guided radiation therapy can image a target and irradiate it at the same time. Superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) is a liver-specific contrast agent that can selectively visualize liver tumors, even if plain MRI does not depict them. The purpose of this study was to present a proof of concept of SPIO-enhanced MRI-guided radiation therapy for liver tumor.

Case presentation

MRI-guided stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) was planned for a patient with impaired renal function who developed liver metastases after nephroureterectomy for ureteral cancer. Because liver metastasis was not visualized on plain MRI, SPIO-enhanced MRI was performed at 0.35 T using true fast imaging with steady-state free precession (true FISP) pulse sequence and SABR was performed. Liver metastasis was clearly visualized by SPIO-enhanced MRI, and MRI-guided SABR was performed without adverse events.

Conclusion

Even if liver metastasis is not visualized by plain MRI, liver metastasis can be clearly depicted by administering SPIO, and MRI-guided radiation therapy can be performed.

Stereotactic MR-guided online adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) for the treatment of liver metastases in oligometastatic patients: initial clinical experience

Purpose

We aimed to present our initial clinical experience on the implementation of a stereotactic MR-guided online adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) for the treatment of liver metastases in oligometastatic disease.

Materials and Methods

Twenty-one patients (24 lesions) with liver metastasis treated with SMART were included in this retrospective study. Step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy technique was used with daily plan adaptation. During delivery, real-time imaging was used by acquiring planar magnetic resonance images in sagittal plane for monitoring and gating. Acute and late toxicities were recorded both during treatment and follow-up visits.

Results

The median follow-up time was 11.6 months (range, 2.2 to 24.6 months). The median delivered total dose was 50 Gy (range, 40 to 60 Gy); with a median fraction number of 5 (range, 3 to 8 fractions) and the median fraction dose was 10 Gy (range, 7.5 to 18 Gy). Ninety-three fractions (83.7%) among 111 fractions were re-optimized. No patients were lost to follow-up and all patients were alive except one at the time of analysis. All of the patients had either complete (80.9%) or partial (19.1%) response at irradiated sites. Estimated 1-year overall survival was 93.3%. Intrahepatic and extrahepatic progression-free survival was 89.7% and 73.5% at 1 year, respectively. There was no grade 3 or higher acute or late toxicities experienced during the treatment and follow-up course.

Conclusion

SMART represents a new, noninvasive and effective alternative to current ablative radiotherapy methods for treatment of liver metastases in oligometastatic disease with the advantages of better visualization of soft tissue, real-time tumor tracking and potentially reduced toxicity to organs at risk.

No Cases of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis after Administration of Gadoxetic Acid

Background Gadoxetic acid (GA) has distinctive pharmacokinetic properties with important applications in hepatobiliary imaging. However, there are limited data evaluating the safety of GA administration in patients with impaired kidney function and the incidence of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF). Purpose To evaluate safety of GA regarding risk of NSF in patients with impaired kidney function. Materials and Methods This retrospective study identified all GA-enhanced MRI (hereafter, GA MRI) examinations performed between July 2008 and December 2019 through a search of the electronic medical record. Serum creatinine values within 180 days or less of each GA MRI examination were retrieved and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated. The eGFR value nearest to each MRI examination was used. A separate search in the electronic medical record was also performed to identify patients with NSF. Dermatologists, nephrologists, and nephrologists at our institution were surveyed for any cases of NSF. In patients with NSF, all MRI examinations performed and contrast agents administered to these patients were recorded. Results Overall, 7820 GA MRI examinations were identified, performed in 5351 patients (3022 women and 2329 men). These included 299 examinations (242 patients) with eGFR of 30-44 mL/min/1.73 m² and 183 examinations (157 patients) with eGFR less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m². There were 109 examinations (in 94 patients) with eGFR of 15-29 mL/min/1.73 m², 40 examinations (in 39 patients) with eGFR less than 15 mL/min/1.73 m², and 34 examinations in 27 patients undergoing hemodialysis. Seventeen patients with eGFR less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m² or undergoing dialysis underwent GA MRI two or more times. Eighteen patients with biopsy-confirmed NSF were identified, none of whom were exposed to GA. The mean follow-up period for GA MRI examinations performed in patients with severe kidney impairment was 4.2 years (range, 0.2-11.3 years). Conclusion Gadoxetic acid may be safe with respect to nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in this patient population, although further studies are needed to confirm this. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Davenport and Shankar in this issue.

Diagnostic Efficacy and Safety of Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine in Patients With Known or Suspected Focal Liver Lesions: Results of a Clinical Phase III Study

Purpose:

The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy and safety of gadoxetate disodium vs gadobenate dimeglumine in patients with known or suspected focal liver lesions.

Methods:

This was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, inter-individual Phase III study. The primary target—technical efficacy—was already published. Here, secondary efficacy parameters—sensitivity and specificity—and safety in specific patient populations are presented. Patients with suspected or known focal liver lesions scheduled for contrast-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were recruited and categorized in 4 a priori specified subgroups: (1) all patients, (2) patients with liver cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]), (3) patients with cirrhosis, and (4) patients with HCC + cirrhosis. Dual multi-detector liver computed tomography (CT) served as standard of reference.

Results:

A total of 295 patients were included. While the overall increase in sensitivity across all 4 patient groups was comparable for gadoxetate disodium (increase from pre- to post-contrast ranging from 6.2% to 9.9%) and gadobenate dimeglumine (ranging from −2.9% to 10.0%), significant differences were seen for some of the subgroups. There was a significantly higher increase in sensitivity for gadoxetate disodium in patients with HCC (7%) and HCC + cirrhosis (12.8%) in comparison with gadobenate dimeglumine. Specificity decreased for both agents: gadoxetate disodium by −2.8% to −6.3% and gadobenate dimeglumine by −3.3% to −8.7%. Gadoxetate showed a significantly lower loss of specificity in all subgroups. Safety was comparable in both groups.

Conclusions:

Gadoxetate disodium proved to be an effective liver-specific MRI contrast agent. Some distinct advantages over gadobenate dimeglumine were demonstrated in patients with HCC and patients with HCC + liver cirrhosis for sensitivity and specificity in liver lesion detection.

Safety profile of gadoxetate disodium in elderly patients (≥65 years)

Background

Safety data on routine clinical use of gadoxetate disodium in elderly patients is not reported yet.

Purpose

To assess the safety of liver specific gadoxetate disodium in contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in elderly patients (≥65 years) in comparison to adults (18–64 years).

Material and Methods

Safety data on gadoxetate disodium were analyzed from 12 clinical phase II–III studies and from our pharmacovigilance database. A comparison between elderly (≥65 years) versus adults (18–64 years) was performed with respect to the frequency of drug-related adverse events (AEs) in clinical phase II–III studies and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the pharmacovigilance database.

Results

In clinical studies, 1989 patients were enrolled: 675 elderly and 1314 adults. Twenty-three elderly patients (3.4%) suffered at least one drug-related AE in contrast to 58 patients (4.4%) in the group of adults (odds ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval = 0.45–1.27). Since marketing authorization in 2004, more than 3.5 million patients have been exposed to gadoxetate disodium worldwide: 1.7 million (48.6%) in elderly and 1.8 million (51.4%) in adults. The number of patients with post-marketing ADRs (total n = 793) was 354 (0.021%) in the elderly group and 439 (0.024%) in the adult group. Thus, there were significantly fewer patients with ADRs reported in the group of elderly versus adults (P = 0.028). Hypersensitivity/immune system disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, and respiratory disorders were the most frequent ADRs in both groups, elderly and adults.

Conclusion

The incidence of drug-related AEs in clinical studies was similar and that of patients with ADRs in the post-marketing setting was lower in elderly (≥65 years) compared with younger adults aged 18–64 years. Overall, gadoxetate disodium shows a favorable safety profile in both age groups.

Combining hyperpolarized 13 C MRI with a liver-specific gadolinium contrast agent for selective assessment of hepatocyte metabolism

PURPOSE

Hyperpolarized 13 C MRI is a powerful tool for studying metabolism, but can lack tissue specificity. Gadoxetate is a gadolinium-based MRI contrast agent that is selectively taken into hepatocytes. The goal of this project was to investigate whether gadoxetate can be used to selectively suppress the hyperpolarized signal arising from hepatocytes, which could in future studies be applied to generate specificity for signal from abnormal cell types.

METHODS

Baseline gadoxetate uptake kinetics were measured using T1 -weighted contrast enhanced imaging. Relaxivity of gadoxetate was measured for [1-13 C]pyruvate, [1-13 C]lactate, and [1-13 C]alanine. Four healthy rats were imaged with hyperpolarized [1-13 C]pyruvate using a three-dimensional (3D) MRSI sequence prior to and 15 min following administration of gadoxetate. The lactate:pyruvate ratio and alanine:pyruvate ratios were measured in liver and kidney.

RESULTS

Overall, the hyperpolarized signal decreased approximately 60% as a result of pre-injection of gadoxetate. In liver, the lactate:pyruvate and alanine:pyruvate ratios decreased 42% and 78%, respectively (P < 0.05) following gadoxetate administration. In kidneys, these ratios did not change significantly. Relaxivity of gadoxetate for [1-13 C]alanine was 12.6 times higher than relaxivity of gadoxetate for [1-13 C]pyruvate, explaining the greater selective relaxation effect on alanine.

CONCLUSIONS

The liver-specific gadolinium contrast-agent gadoxetate can selectively suppress normal hepatocyte contributions to hyperpolarized 13 C MRI signals. Magn Reson Med 77:2356-2363, 2017. © 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

Safety of gadoxetate disodium: results from six clinical phase IV studies in 8194 patients

Background

Safety data on routine clinical use of gadoxetate disodium for liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not reported yet.

Purpose

To assess the safety profile of gadoxetate disodium for liver MRI in the routine clinical setting.

Material and Methods

Six multicenter studies were performed in Europe, USA, Australia, and Asia to evaluate the safety and efficacy of gadoxetate disodium (Primovist®/Eovist®) enhanced liver MRI. Patients received a single intravenous bolus injection of the standard approved dose of 0.025 mmol/kg body weight (0.1 mL/kg). The number of patients, the characteristics of adverse events, related adverse events, and serious adverse events were analyzed.

Results

A total of 8194 patients were included in the database. A total of 141 patients (1.7%) reported 230 AEs of which 129 were considered being related to the use of gadoxetate disodium by the investigators. None of the AEs in the pediatric population (n = 52) were related. The most frequent AEs independent of relationship to the drug included dyspnea (25/0.31%), nausea (22/0.27%), liver disorders (13/0.16%), and renal disorders (9/0.11%). Nine related SAEs were recorded. No patient died during the studies.

Conclusion

Gadoxetate disodium for liver MRI is safe and well tolerated in the routine clinical setting.

Safety and Efficacy of Gadoxetate Disodium-Enhanced Liver MRI in Pediatric Patients Aged >2 Months to <18 Years-Results of a Retrospective, Multicenter Study

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and efficacy of gadoxetate disodium–enhanced liver MR imaging in pediatric patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective, multicenter study including pediatric patients aged >2 months to <18 years who underwent contrast-enhanced liver MRI due to focal liver lesions. A single intravenous bolus injection of 0.025 to 0.05 mmol/kg body weight of gadoxetate disodium was administered. Adverse events (AEs) up to 24 hours after injection were recorded and a one-year follow-up was conducted for all serious and unexpected AEs. Efficacy was defined based on the additional diagnostic information obtained from the combined (pre- and postcontrast) image sets as compared with the precontrast image sets by blinded reading.

RESULTS

A total of 52 patients for safety and 51 patients for efficacy analyses were evaluated. Twenty-two patients (42.3%) reported a total of 51 serious AEs (SAEs) and one AE after one year. No SAE or AE was related to gadoxetate disodium injection. Gadoxetate disodium–related effects on vital signs were not seen. Additional diagnostic information was obtained for 86.3% of patients. The three most improved efficacy variables were lesion-to-background contrast, lesion characterization, and improved border delineation in 78.4%, 76.5%, and 70.6% of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Gadoxetate disodium in pediatric patients did not raise any clinically significant safety concern. Contrast enhancement provided additional clinically relevant information.

The Incidence, Classification, and Management of Acute Adverse Reactions to the Low-Osmolar Iodinated Contrast Media Isovue and Ultravist in Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography Scanning

Some epidemiologic surveillance studies have recorded adverse drug reactions to radiocontrast agents. We aimed to investigate the incidence and management of acute adverse reactions (AARs) to Ultravist-370 and Isovue-370 in patients who underwent contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scanning.Data from 137,473 patients were analyzed. They had undergone enhanced CT scanning with intravenous injection of Ultravist-370 or Isovue-370 during the period of January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2012 in our hospital. We investigated and classified AARs according to the American College of Radiology and the Chinese Society of Radiology (CSR) guidelines for iodinated contrast media. We analyzed risk factors for AARs and compared the AARs induced by Ultravist-370 and Isovue-370.Four hundred and twenty-eight (0.31%) patients experienced AARs, which included 330 (0.24%) patients with mild AARs, 82 (0.06%) patients with moderate AARs, and 16 (0.01%) patients with severe AARs (including 3 cases of cardiac arrest and one case of death). The incidence of AARs was higher with Ultravist-370 than with Isovue-370 (0.38% vs 0.24%, P < 0.001), but only for mild AARs (0.32% vs 0.16%, P < 0.001). Analyses on risk factors indicated that female patients (n = 221, 0.43%, P < 0.001), emergency patients (n = 11, 0.51%, P < 0.001), elderly patients aged 50 to 60 years (n = 135, 0.43%, P < 0.001), and patients who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) (n = 55, 0.51%, P < 0.001) had a higher risk of AARs. Cutaneous manifestations (50.52%)-especially rash (59.74%)-were the most frequent mild AARs. Cardiovascular manifestations accounted for most moderate and severe AARs (62.91% and 48.28%, respectively). After proper management, the symptoms and signs of 96.5% of the AARs resolved within 24 hours without sequelae.Ultravist-370 and Isovue-370 are safe for patients undergoing enhanced CT scanning. The incidence of AARs is higher with Ultravist-370 than with Isovue-370, but this difference is limited only to the mild AARs. The incidence of AARs could be affected by multiple factors.