1
|
Salem R, Garin E, Boucher E, Fowers K, Lam M, Padia S, Harris W. Optimal patient selection for yttrium-90 glass plus chemotherapy in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases: additional quality of life, efficacy, and safety analyses from the EPOCH study. Oncologist 2024; 29:681-689. [PMID: 38985849 PMCID: PMC11299931 DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2023] [Accepted: 04/23/2024] [Indexed: 07/12/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evaluating transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma of the liver who have progressed on first-line chemotherapy (EPOCH) demonstrated superior outcomes using yttrium-90 glass microspheres plus chemotherapy (TARE/Chemo) vs chemotherapy (Chemo) to treat colorectal liver metastases. Additional exploratory analyses were undertaken to assess the impact of TARE/Chemo on efficacy, safety, time to subsequent therapy, time to deterioration in quality of life (QoL), and identify criteria for improved patient selection. METHODS Time to deterioration in QoL was analyzed for the primary study population. Subsequently, a post hoc analysis was undertaken to identify subgroups for which time to deterioration in QoL was improved with TARE/Chemo vs Chemo. Progression-free survival (PFS), hepatic (h)PFS, time to subsequent therapy, and safety outcomes were compared between treatments. RESULTS The primary population showed no significant difference in time to deterioration in QoL between treatment arms; however, significance was seen in 2 identified subgroups, namely: Subgroup A (N = 303) which excluded patients with both Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 1 and baseline CEA ≥ 35 ng/mL from both treatment arms; subgroup B (N = 168) additionally excluded patients with KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma) mutation. In subgroup A, TARE/Chemo patients (N = 143) demonstrated superior outcomes vs Chemo (N = 160): PFS (9.4 vs. 7.6 months, hazard ratio (HR): 0.64; 1-sided P = .0020), hPFS (10.8 vs. 7.6 months, HR: 0.53; 1-sided P < .0001), time to deterioration in QoL (5.7 vs. 3.9 months, HR: 0.65; 1-sided P = .0063), and time to subsequent therapy (21.2 vs. 10.5 months, HR: 0.52; 1-sided P < .0001). Subgroup B patients showed similar but larger significant differences between treatment arms. Median PFS, hPFS, and time to deterioration in QoL were numerically greater for TARE/Chemo in both subgroups vs the primary population, with the greatest magnitude of difference in subgroup B. Both subgroups exhibited higher percentage of CEA responders and improved ORR with TARE/Chemo vs chemo alone. Safety (reported as event rate/100 patient-years) was higher with Chemo in all populations. Additional efficacy analyses in the primary population are also reported. CONCLUSIONS Careful patient selection, including consideration of the prognostic factors ECOG, baseline CEA, and KRAS status, sets outcome expectations in patients with colorectal liver metastases suitable for TARE/Chemo as second-line treatment (Trial Registry Number: NCT01483027).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Riad Salem
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Etienne Garin
- Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France
| | | | - Kirk Fowers
- Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, United States
| | - Marnix Lam
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Siddharth Padia
- Department of Radiology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - William Harris
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
González-Flores E, Zambudio N, Pardo-Moreno P, Gonzalez-Astorga B, de la Rúa JR, Triviño-Ibáñez EM, Navarro P, Espinoza-Cámac N, Casado MÁ, Rodríguez-Fernández A. Recommendations for the management of yttrium-90 radioembolization in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases: a multidisciplinary review. Clin Transl Oncol 2024; 26:851-863. [PMID: 37747636 PMCID: PMC10981623 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-023-03299-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Accepted: 07/27/2023] [Indexed: 09/26/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Strategies for the treatment of liver metastases from colon cancer (lmCRC) are constantly evolving. Radioembolization with yttrium 90 (Y-90 TARE) has made significant advancements in treating liver tumors and is now considered a potential option allowing for future resection. This study reviewed the scientific evidence and developed recommendations for using Y-90 TARE as a treatment strategy for patients with unresectable lmCRC. METHODS A multidisciplinary scientific committee, consisting of experts in medical oncology, hepatobiliary surgery, radiology, and nuclear medicine, all with extensive experience in treating patients with ImCRC with Y-90 TARE, led this project. The committee established the criteria for conducting a comprehensive literature review on Y-90 TARE in the treatment of lmCRC. The data extraction process involved addressing initial preliminary inquiries, which were consolidated into a final set of questions. RESULTS This review offers recommendations for treating patients with lmCRC using Y-90 TARE, addressing four areas covering ten common questions: 1) General issues (multidisciplinary tumor committee, indications for treatment, contraindications); 2) Previous process (predictive biomarkers for patient selection, preintervention tests, published evidence); 3) Procedure (standard procedure); and 4) Post-intervention follow-up (potential toxicity and its management, parameters for evaluation, quality of life). CONCLUSIONS Based on the insights of the multidisciplinary committee, this document offers a comprehensive overview of the technical aspects involved in the management of Y-90 TARE. It synthesizes recommendations for applying Y-90 TARE across various phases of the treatment process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Encarna González-Flores
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
- Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria IBS, Granada, Spain
| | - Natalia Zambudio
- Surgery Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - Pedro Pardo-Moreno
- Radiodiagnostic Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | | | | | - Eva M Triviño-Ibáñez
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - Pablo Navarro
- Radiodiagnostic Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - Nataly Espinoza-Cámac
- Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Iberia (PORIB), Paseo Joaquín Rodrigo 4-I, Pozuelo de Alarcón, 28224, Madrid, Spain.
| | - Miguel Ángel Casado
- Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Iberia (PORIB), Paseo Joaquín Rodrigo 4-I, Pozuelo de Alarcón, 28224, Madrid, Spain
| | - Antonio Rodríguez-Fernández
- Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria IBS, Granada, Spain
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Alexander ES, Petre EN, Zhao K, Sotirchos V, Namakydoust A, Moussa A, Yuan G, Sofocleous CT, Solomon SB, Ziv E. Yttrium-90 Transarterial Radioembolization of Primary Lung Cancer Metastases to the Liver. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024; 35:214-225.e2. [PMID: 37923172 PMCID: PMC11323230 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2023.10.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2023] [Revised: 10/10/2023] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 11/07/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess whether yttrium-90 transarterial radioembolization (TARE) is safe and effective in the treatment of primary lung cancer metastases to the liver (LCML). METHODS AND METHODS This retrospective study included 57 patients with LCML who were treated with 79 TARE treatments. Histology included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (n = 27), small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (n = 17), and lung carcinoid (LC) (n = 13). Survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method; differences between groups were estimated using log rank test. Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine factors influencing survival. Adverse events were graded using the Society of Interventional Radiology Adverse Events Classification. RESULTS Median overall survival (OS) was as follows: NSCLC, 8.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3-16.4 months); SCLC, 4.1 months (95% CI, 1.9-6.6 months); and LC, 43.5 months (95% CI, 7.8-61.4 months). For NSCLC, presence of bilobar vs unilobar disease (hazard ratio [HR], 5.24; 95% CI, 1.64-16.79; P = .002); more tumors, 2-5 vs 1 (HR, 4.88; 95% CI, 1.17-20.37; P = .003) and >5 vs 1 (HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 0.95-6.92; P = .05); and lobar vs segmental treatment (HR, 2.56; 95% CI, 0-NA; P = .002) were negative predictors of OS. For SCLC, receipt of >2 lines of chemotherapy vs ≤2 lines (HR, 3.16; 95% CI, 0.95-10.47; P = .05) was a negative predictor of OS. For LC, tumor involvement of >50% was a negative predictor of OS (HR, 3.77 × 1015; 95% CI, 0-NA; P = .002). There were 11 of 79 severe or life-threatening adverse events within 30 days (abdominal pain, altered mental status, nausea/vomiting, acalculous/aseptic cholecystitis, hyponatremia, pancreatitis, renal failure, and death from pneumonia). CONCLUSIONS TARE has an acceptable safety profile for the treatment of LCML, with survival benefits best seen in LC tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erica S Alexander
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
| | - Elena N Petre
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Ken Zhao
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Vlasios Sotirchos
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Azadeh Namakydoust
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Amgad Moussa
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Gavin Yuan
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Stephen B Solomon
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Etay Ziv
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
DePietro DM, Li X, Shamimi-Noori SM. Chemoembolization Beyond Hepatocellular Carcinoma: What Tumors Can We Treat and When? Semin Intervent Radiol 2024; 41:27-47. [PMID: 38495263 PMCID: PMC10940046 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1777716] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/19/2024]
Abstract
Liver metastases are the most common malignancy found in the liver and are 20 to 40 times more common than primary hepatic tumors, including hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients with liver metastases often present with advanced disease and are not eligible for curative-intent surgery or ablative techniques. The unique hepatic arterial blood supply of liver metastases allows interventional radiologists to target these tumors with transarterial therapies. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has been studied in the treatment of liver metastases originating from a variety of primary malignancies and has demonstrated benefits in terms of hepatic progression-free survival, overall survival, and symptomatic relief, among other benefits. Depending on the primary tumor from which they originate, liver metastases may have different indications for TACE, may utilize different TACE regimens and techniques, and may result in different post-procedural outcomes. This review offers an overview of TACE techniques and specific considerations in the treatment of liver metastases, provides an in-depth review of TACE in the treatment of liver metastases originating from colorectal cancer, neuroendocrine tumor, and uveal melanoma, which represent some of the many tumors beyond hepatocellular carcinoma that can be treated by TACE, and summarizes data regarding when one should consider TACE in their treatment algorithms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel M. DePietro
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Xin Li
- Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Susan M. Shamimi-Noori
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Alonso JC, Casans I, González FM, Fuster D, Rodríguez A, Sánchez N, Oyagüez I, Williams AO, Espinoza N. Economic evaluations of radioembolization with yttrium-90 microspheres in liver metastases of colorectal cancer: a systematic review. BMC Gastroenterol 2023; 23:181. [PMID: 37226091 PMCID: PMC10210491 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-023-02793-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2023] [Indexed: 05/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Transarterial radioembolization with yttrium-90 (Y-90 TARE) microspheres therapy has demonstrated positive clinical benefits for the treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer (lmCRC). This study aims to conduct a systematic review of the available economic evaluations of Y-90 TARE for lmCRC. METHODS English and Spanish publications were identified from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, MEDES health technology assessment agencies, and scientific congress databases published up to May 2021. The inclusion criteria considered only economic evaluations; thus, other types of studies were excluded. Purchasing-power-parity exchange rates for the year 2020 ($US PPP) were applied for cost harmonisation. RESULTS From 423 records screened, seven economic evaluations (2 cost-analyses [CA] and 5 cost-utility-analyses [CUA]) were included (6 European and 1 USA). All included studies (n = 7) were evaluated from a payer and the social perspective (n = 1). Included studies evaluated patients with unresectable liver-predominant metastases of CRC, refractory to chemotherapy (n = 6), or chemotherapy-naïve (n = 1). Y-90 TARE was compared to best supportive care (BSC) (n = 4), an association of folinic acid, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) (n = 1), and hepatic artery infusion (HAI) (n = 2). Y-90 TARE increased life-years gained (LYG) versus BSC (1.12 and 1.35 LYG) and versus HAI (0.37 LYG). Y-90 TARE increased the quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) versus BSC (0.81 and 0.83 QALY) and versus HAI (0.35 QALY). When considering a lifetime horizon, Y-90 TARE reported incremental cost compared to BSC (range 19,225 to 25,320 $US PPP) and versus HAI (14,307 $US PPP). Y-90 TARE reported incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) between 23,875 $US PPP/QALY to 31,185 $US PPP/QALY. The probability of Y-90 TARE being cost-effective at £ 30,000/QALY threshold was between 56% and 57%. CONCLUSIONS Our review highlights that Y-90 TARE could be a cost-effective therapy either as a monotherapy or when combined with systemic therapy for treating ImCRC. However, despite the current clinical evidence on Y-90 TARE in the treatment of ImCRC, the global economic evaluation reported for Y-90 TARE in ImCRC is limited (n = 7), therefore, we recommend future economic evaluations on Y-90 TARE versus alternative options in treating ImCRC from the societal perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J C Alonso
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - I Casans
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario, Valencia, Spain
| | - F M González
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Universitario Central, Asturias, Spain
| | - D Fuster
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain
| | - A Rodríguez
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - N Sánchez
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain
| | - I Oyagüez
- Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia (PORIB), Madrid, Spain
| | - A O Williams
- Boston Scientific Marlborough, Marlborough, MA, USA
| | - N Espinoza
- Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia (PORIB), Madrid, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Ekmekcioglu O, Erdem U, Arican P, Ozvar H, Bostanci O. The value of radioembolisation therapy on metastatic liver tumours - a single centre experience. Nuklearmedizin 2023; 62:214-219. [PMID: 36854382 DOI: 10.1055/a-2026-0851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/02/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Local treatments used in metastatic liver tumours efficiently control the disease and survival. Transarterial radioembolisation (TARE) is a safely used locoregional treatment method. We aim to investigate the impact of TARE on different kinds of metastatic liver tumours and the effect of pre-treatment clinical findings. MATERIAL AND METHODS The patients with metastatic liver tumours referred to our department for radioembolisation were retrospectively evaluated. All patients were given a Y-90 glass microsphere after being selected by the appropriate clinical and imaging criteria, lung shunt fraction levels, vascular investigation, and macro aggregated albumin (MAA) scintigraphy performed in the angiography unit. RESULTS Thirty-four (17 women, 17 men) patients were suitable for the treatment. Patients were treated with 115.88±47.84 Gy Y-90 glass Microspheres. The mean survival rate was 14.59±12.59 months after treatment. Higher survival rates were detected in patients who had higher pre-treatment serum albumin levels. The optimum cut-off value of albumin to predict response to treatment was 4 g/dl with 88.89% sensitivity, 62.50% specificity, 72.73% PPV and 83.33% NPV. Furthermore, one unit increase in age increased mortality 1.152 times in our patient group. CONCLUSION Radioembolisation is a safe and efficient method for controlling metastatic liver disease. Albumin levels significantly affect predicting response; higher albumin levels are related to higher survival rates. Furthermore, older age positively correlated with mortality rates in our patient group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ozgul Ekmekcioglu
- Nuclear Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye
| | - Umut Erdem
- Interventional Radiology Department, University of Health Sciences, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye
| | - Pelin Arican
- Nuclear Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye
| | - Hikmet Ozvar
- Radiation Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye
| | - Ozgur Bostanci
- Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, University of Health Sciences, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Tammaro V, Carlomagno N, Santangelo M, Calogero A, Dodaro CA, Vernillo A, Sica A, Peluso G, Campanile S, Sagnelli E, Sagnelli C. One-stage resection of primary colorectal cancer and hepatic metastases using the Habib Device: analysis of 40 consecutive cases treated in a Unit of general surgery. Minerva Med 2022; 113:846-852. [PMID: 32407049 DOI: 10.23736/s0026-4806.20.06613-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND More than 50% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present or develop hepatic metastases (HM). The intraoperative use of the Habib 4X® radio frequency probe device is safe in resetting HM and allows a one-stage resection of both CRC and HM with a similar mortality rate than a two-stage surgical treatment. METHODS After an exhaustive residential training at the reference center for hepato-biliary surgery of the Imperial College of London, we treated at our unit of general surgery 40 consecutive patients with CRC and HM with the one-stage resection, using the Habib 4X® intraoperative radiofrequency probe device to reset HM. RESULTS None of the 40 patients died during the intra-operatory and post-operatory periods, none presented liver failures during the postoperative course nor complication related to the Habib's resection procedure (e.g. bleeding, abscess, bile leak). The amount of intra-operative liver bleeding was minimal. New HM arose in 10 (25%) cases, with a mean disease-free interval of 13 months, but the hepatic tissue close to previous resections remained cancer-free. The 69.7% of patients were disease-free at month 24 of the post-operative follow-up and 5-year rate was about 70%. CONCLUSIONS The data suggest that surgeons well trained at a reference center for hepato-biliary surgery may perform with excellent results the one-stage CRC and HM resection with the Habib 4X® device even in a Unit of general surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincenzo Tammaro
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy -
| | - Nicola Carlomagno
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Michele Santangelo
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Armando Calogero
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Concetta A Dodaro
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Antonio Vernillo
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Antonello Sica
- Department of Precision Medicine, Luigi Vanvitelli University of Campania, Naples, Italy
| | - Gaia Peluso
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Silvia Campanile
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Evangelista Sagnelli
- Department of Mental Health and Public Medicine, Luigi Vanvitelli University of Campania, Naples, Italy
| | - Caterina Sagnelli
- Department of Mental Health and Public Medicine, Luigi Vanvitelli University of Campania, Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Park J, Young BD, Miller EJ. Potential novel imaging targets of inflammation in cardiac sarcoidosis. J Nucl Cardiol 2022; 29:2171-2187. [PMID: 34734365 DOI: 10.1007/s12350-021-02838-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2021] [Accepted: 09/26/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) is an inflammatory disease with high morbidity and mortality, with a pathognomonic feature of non-caseating granulomatous inflammation. While 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is a well-established modality to image inflammation and diagnose CS, there are limitations to its specificity and reproducibility. Imaging focused on the molecular processes of inflammation including the receptors and cellular microenvironments present in sarcoid granulomas provides opportunities to improve upon FDG-PET imaging for CS. This review will highlight the current limitations of FDG-PET imaging for CS while discussing emerging new nuclear imaging molecular targets for the imaging of cardiac sarcoidosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jakob Park
- Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Bryan D Young
- Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA
| | - Edward J Miller
- Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Emmons EC, Bishay S, Du L, Krebs H, Gandhi RT, Collins ZS, O'Hara R, Akhter NM, Wang EA, Grilli C, Brower JS, Peck SR, Petroziello M, Abdel Aal AK, Golzarian J, Kennedy AS, Matsuoka L, Sze DY, Brown DB. Survival and Toxicities after 90Y Transarterial Radioembolization of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the RESIN Registry. Radiology 2022; 305:228-236. [PMID: 35762890 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.220387] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Background Patients with unresectable, chemorefractory hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer have considerable mortality. The role of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with yttrium 90 (90Y) microspheres is not defined because most reports are from a single center with limited patient numbers. Purpose To report outcomes in participants with colorectal cancer metastases treated with resin 90Y microspheres from a prospective multicenter observational registry. Materials and Methods This study treated enrolled adult participants with TARE using resin microspheres for liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer at 42 centers, with enrollment from July 2015 through August 2020. TARE was used as the first-, second-, or third-line therapy or beyond. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity outcomes were assessed by line of therapy by using Kaplan-Meier analysis for OS and PFS and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5, for toxicities. Results A total of 498 participants (median age, 60 years [IQR, 52-69 years]; 298 men [60%]) were treated. TARE was used in first-line therapy in 74 of 442 participants (17%), second-line therapy in 180 participants (41%), and third-line therapy or beyond in 188 participants (43%). The median OS of the entire cohort was 15.0 months (95% CI: 13.3, 16.9). The median OS by line of therapy was 13.9 months for first-line therapy, 17.4 months for second-line therapy, and 12.5 months for third-line therapy (χ2 = 9.7; P = .002). Whole-group PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI: 6.4, 9.5). The median PFS by line of therapy was 7.9 months for first-line therapy, 10.0 months for second-line therapy, and 5.9 months for third-line therapy (χ2 = 8.3; P = .004). TARE-attributable grade 3 or 4 hepatic toxicities were 8.4% for bilirubin (29 of 347 participants) and 3.7% for albumin (13 of 347). Grade 3 and higher toxicities were greater with third-line therapy for bilirubin (P = .01) and albumin (P = .008). Conclusion Median overall survival (OS) after transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with yttrium 90 microspheres for liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer was 15.0 months. The longest OS was achieved when TARE was part of second-line therapy. Grade 3 or greater hepatic function toxicity rates were less than 10%. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02685631 Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Liddell in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erica C Emmons
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Steven Bishay
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Liping Du
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Henry Krebs
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Ripal T Gandhi
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Zachary S Collins
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Ryan O'Hara
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Nabeel M Akhter
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Eric A Wang
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Christopher Grilli
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Jayson S Brower
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Shannon R Peck
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Michael Petroziello
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Ahmed K Abdel Aal
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Jafar Golzarian
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Andrew S Kennedy
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Lea Matsuoka
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Daniel Y Sze
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| | - Daniel B Brown
- From the Departments of Interventional Radiology (E.C.E., D.B.B.), Biostatistics (L.D.), and Transplant Surgery (L.M.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Ave S, CCC-1118 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN 37232; Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Atlanta, Ga (H.K.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, Fla (R.T.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kan (Z.S.C.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (R.O.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Md (N.M.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC (E.A.W.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Christiana Medical Center, Newark, Del (C.G.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Providence Sacred Heart, Spokane, Wash (J.S.B.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD (S.R.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY (M.P.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas, Houston, Tex (A.K.A.A.); Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn (J.G.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, Tenn (A.S.K.); and Department of Interventional Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif (D.Y.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Liddell RP. 90Y Transarterial Radioembolization for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Radiology 2022; 305:237-238. [PMID: 35762893 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.221345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Robert P Liddell
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Sheik Zayed Tower, Ste 7203, 1800 Orleans St, Baltimore, MD 21287
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ytrrium-90 transarterial radioembolization in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. Clin Transl Oncol 2022; 24:796-808. [PMID: 35013882 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-021-02745-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2021] [Accepted: 11/29/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with yttrium-90 (Y90) is a promising alternative strategy to treat liver tumors and liver metastasis from colorectal cancer (CRC), as it selectively delivers radioactive isotopes to the tumor via the hepatic artery, sparring surrounding liver tissue. The landscape of TARE indications is constantly evolving. This strategy is considered for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with liver-confined disease and preserved liver function in whom neither TACE nor systemic therapy is possible. In patients with liver metastases from CRC, TARE is advised when other chemotherapeutic options have failed. Recent phase III trials have not succeeded to prove benefit in overall survival; however, it has helped to better understand the patients that may benefit from TARE based on subgroup analysis. New strategies and treatment combinations are being investigated in ongoing clinical trials. The aim of this review is to summarize the clinical applications of TARE in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies.
Collapse
|
12
|
Entezari P, Gabr A, Salem R, Lewandowski RJ. Yttrium-90 for colorectal liver metastasis - the promising role of radiation segmentectomy as an alternative local cure. Int J Hyperthermia 2022; 39:620-626. [DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1933215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Pouya Entezari
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Ahmed Gabr
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Riad Salem
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, USA
- Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, Comprehensive Transplant Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Robert J. Lewandowski
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, USA
- Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, Comprehensive Transplant Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Weber M, Lam M, Chiesa C, Konijnenberg M, Cremonesi M, Flamen P, Gnesin S, Bodei L, Kracmerova T, Luster M, Garin E, Herrmann K. EANM procedure guideline for the treatment of liver cancer and liver metastases with intra-arterial radioactive compounds. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022; 49:1682-1699. [PMID: 35146577 PMCID: PMC8940802 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-021-05600-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 78] [Impact Index Per Article: 39.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2021] [Accepted: 10/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Primary liver tumours (i.e. hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC)) are among the most frequent cancers worldwide. However, only 10-20% of patients are amenable to curative treatment, such as resection or transplant. Liver metastases are most frequently caused by colorectal cancer, which accounts for the second most cancer-related deaths in Europe. In both primary and secondary tumours, radioembolization has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment option. The vast potential of personalized dosimetry has also been shown, resulting in markedly increased response rates and overall survival. In a rapidly evolving therapeutic landscape, the role of radioembolization will be subject to changes. Therefore, the decision for radioembolization should be taken by a multidisciplinary tumour board in accordance with the current clinical guidelines. The purpose of this procedure guideline is to assist the nuclear medicine physician in treating and managing patients undergoing radioembolization treatment. PREAMBLE: The European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) is a professional non-profit medical association that facilitates communication worldwide among individuals pursuing clinical and research excellence in nuclear medicine. The EANM was founded in 1985. These guidelines are intended to assist practitioners in providing appropriate nuclear medicine care for patients. They are not inflexible rules or requirements of practice and are not intended, nor should they be used, to establish a legal standard of care. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure or course of action must be made by medical professionals taking into account the unique circumstances of each case. Thus, there is no implication that an approach differing from the guidelines, standing alone, is below the standard of care. To the contrary, a conscientious practitioner may responsibly adopt a course of action different from that set out in the guidelines when, in the reasonable judgment of the practitioner, such course of action is indicated by the condition of the patient, limitations of available resources or advances in knowledge or technology subsequent to publication of the guidelines. The practice of medicine involves not only the science but also the art of dealing with the prevention, diagnosis, alleviation and treatment of disease. The variety and complexity of human conditions make it impossible to always reach the most appropriate diagnosis or to predict with certainty a particular response to treatment. Therefore, it should be recognised that adherence to these guidelines will not ensure an accurate diagnosis or a successful outcome. All that should be expected is that the practitioner will follow a reasonable course of action based on current knowledge, available resources and the needs of the patient to deliver effective and safe medical care. The sole purpose of these guidelines is to assist practitioners in achieving this objective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Weber
- Department of Nuclear medicine, University clinic Essen, Essen, Germany.
| | - M Lam
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - C Chiesa
- Nuclear Medicine, Foundation IRCCS National Tumour Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - M Konijnenberg
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Cremonesi
- Radiation Research Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, MI, Italy
| | - P Flamen
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet-Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), 1000, Brussels, Belgium
| | - S Gnesin
- Institute of Radiation physics, Lausanne University Hospital, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - L Bodei
- Molecular Imaging and Therapy Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - T Kracmerova
- Department of Medical Physics, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - M Luster
- Department of Nuclear medicine, University hospital Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - E Garin
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cancer, Institute Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France
| | - K Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear medicine, University clinic Essen, Essen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Moslim MA, Jeyarajah DR. Narrative review of the role of yttrium-90 selective internal radiation therapy in the surgical management of colorectal liver metastases. J Gastrointest Oncol 2021; 12:2438-2446. [PMID: 34790404 DOI: 10.21037/jgo-21-96] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
The management of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) is complicated and benefits from a multidisciplinary team approach. Liver-directed therapy has been emerging as a modality for better progression-free control. In its early years, selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) with yttrium-90 (Y-90) was confined as an end-of-line therapy. However, literature has supported other roles including: a first-line treatment for CRLM alone or in combination with systemic chemotherapy; an adjunct to second or third-line chemotherapy; and a salvage treatment for chemo-refractory disease. Although future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy may take 3-12 months, the SIRT effect on loco-regional disease control has rendered it to be a useful tool in some pathologies with certain strategic goals. This paper reviews the use of SIRT with Y-90 in a surgical treatment pathway. This includes: (I) an element of multidisciplinary treatment of low-volume CRLMs, (II) convert an R1 to R0 resection by sterilizing the margins of tumor near critical structures, and (III) radiation lobectomy to induce contralateral hypertrophy in order to aid in a safer resection. There are many opportunities to validate the role of SIRT as a first-line therapy along with surgical resection including an umbrella clinical trial design.
Collapse
|
15
|
Haber Z, Lee EW, Price M, Wainberg Z, Hecht JR, Sayre J, Padia SA. Survival Advantage of Yttrium-90 Radioembolization to Systemic Therapy in Patients with Hepatic Metastases from Colorectal Cancer in the Salvage Setting: Results of a Matched Pair Study. Acad Radiol 2021; 28 Suppl 1:S210-S217. [PMID: 34099386 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2021.03.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2020] [Revised: 03/10/2021] [Accepted: 03/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES Patients with hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer have a poor prognosis in the salvage setting. This study assessed the survival benefit of adding transarterial 90Y radioembolization in the salvage setting to systemic therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this retrospective, matched-pair study, 21 patients who underwent radioembolization plus systemic therapy were matched with a cohort of 173 patients who received systemic chemotherapy alone in the salvage setting, defined as progression on at least two different regimens of systemic chemotherapy. Patients were matched one-to-one on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, presence of extrahepatic disease, and presence of tumor KRAS mutation. Radioembolization patients underwent treatment using standard dosimetry to either a hepatic lobe or the whole liver. Survival data was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS Patients who underwent radioembolization plus systemic therapy vs. those who had systemic therapy alone had similar demographics and exposure to prior systemic chemotherapies. Median survival from the date of primary diagnosis was 38 (95% CI 26 to 50) v 25 (95% CI 15 to 35) months in radioembolization with systemic therapy vs. systemic therapy alone (p = 0.17). Median survival from the date of hepatic metastases was 31 (95% CI 23.8 to 38.2) v 20 months (95% CI 10.2 to 29.8) in radioembolization with systemic therapy vs. systemic therapy alone (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION The addition of radioembolization to systemic therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer to the liver may improve survival in the salvage setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary Haber
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Edward Wolfgang Lee
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Megan Price
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Zev Wainberg
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Joel Randolph Hecht
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - James Sayre
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Siddharth A Padia
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Sankhla T, Cheng B, Nezami N, Xing M, Sethi I, Bercu Z, Brandon D, Majdalany B, Schuster DM, Kokabi N. Role of Resin Microsphere Y90 Dosimetry in Predicting Objective Tumor Response, Survival and Treatment Related Toxicity in Surgically Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastasis: A Retrospective Single Institution Study. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13194908. [PMID: 34638392 PMCID: PMC8508412 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13194908] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2021] [Revised: 09/23/2021] [Accepted: 09/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Colorectal liver metastases are difficult to treat, with only a minority of patients eligible for surgical resection. Yttrium-90 selective internal radiation therapy is an alternative treatment currently used for patients who have progressed on chemotherapy. A technique called dosimetry allows clinicians to analyze how much radiation was delivered to target lesions post-treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the relationship of various dosimetric parameters with objective tumor response, overall survival, and treatment related toxicity with the potential goal of optimizing Yttrium-90 treatment in this patient population. Additionally, other potential predictors of survival outcomes, including clinical and demographic factors, were also evaluated. We found that delivering a mean tumor dose ≥100 Gy when using resin microspheres was significantly associated with objective tumor response and prolonged overall survival. In this study, no mean non-tumoral liver dose threshold was found to predict treatment related toxicity. Abstract Purpose: To Evaluate the correlation between tumor dosimetric parameters with objective tumor response (OR) and overall survival (OS) in patients with surgically unresectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) undergoing resin-based Ytrrium-90 selective internal radiation therapy (Y90 SIRT). Materials and Methods: 45 consecutive patients with CRLM underwent resin-based Y90 SIRT in one or both hepatic lobes (66 treated lobes total). Dose volume histograms were created with MIM Sureplan® v.6.9 using post-treatment SPECT/CT. Dosimetry analyses were based on the cumulative volume of the five largest tumors in each treatment session and non-tumoral liver (NTL) dose. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate tumor dosimetric factors in predicting OR by Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors at 3 months post-Y90. Additionally, ROC curve was used to evaluate non-tumoral liver dose as a predictor of grade ≥ 3 liver toxicity and radioembolization induced liver disease (REILD) 3 months post Y90. To minimize for potential confounding demographic and clinical factors, univariate and multivariate analysis of survival with mean tumor dose as one of the factors were also performed. Kaplan-Meier estimation was used for OS analysis from initial Y90 SIRT. Results: 26 out of 45 patients had OR with a median OS of 17.2 months versus 6.8 months for patients without OR (p < 0.001). Mean tumor dose (TD) of the five largest tumors was the strongest predictor of OR with an area under the curve of 0.73 (p < 0.001). Minimum TD, and TD to 30%, 50%, and 70% of tumor volume also predicted OR (p’s < 0.05). Mean TD ≥ 100 Gy predicted a significantly prolonged median OS of 19 vs. 11 months for those receiving TD < 100 Gy (p = 0.016). On univariate analysis, mean TD < 100 Gy, presence of any genomic mutation, presence of MAPK pathway mutation, bilobar hepatic metastases and diffuse metastatic disease (>10 lesions per liver lobe) were found to be predictors of shorter median OS. On multivariate analysis, mean TD < 100 Gy, presence of any genomic mutation, and diffuse hepatic metastatic disease were found to be independent predictors of shorter OS. Overall, six (13.3%) patients developed grade ≥ 3 liver toxicity post Y90 of whom two (4.4%) patients developed REILD. No dose threshold predicting grade ≥ 3 liver toxicity or REILD was identified. Conclusions: Mean TD ≥ 100 Gy in patients with unresectable CRLM undergoing resin-based Y90 SIRT predicts OR and prolonged OS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tina Sankhla
- Division of Interventional Radiology and Image-Guided Medicine, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (T.S.); (N.N.); (M.X.); (Z.B.); (B.M.)
| | - Bernard Cheng
- Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30310, USA;
| | - Nariman Nezami
- Division of Interventional Radiology and Image-Guided Medicine, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (T.S.); (N.N.); (M.X.); (Z.B.); (B.M.)
| | - Minzhi Xing
- Division of Interventional Radiology and Image-Guided Medicine, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (T.S.); (N.N.); (M.X.); (Z.B.); (B.M.)
| | - Ila Sethi
- Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (I.S.); (D.B.); (D.M.S.)
| | - Zachary Bercu
- Division of Interventional Radiology and Image-Guided Medicine, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (T.S.); (N.N.); (M.X.); (Z.B.); (B.M.)
| | - David Brandon
- Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (I.S.); (D.B.); (D.M.S.)
| | - Bill Majdalany
- Division of Interventional Radiology and Image-Guided Medicine, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (T.S.); (N.N.); (M.X.); (Z.B.); (B.M.)
| | - David M. Schuster
- Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (I.S.); (D.B.); (D.M.S.)
| | - Nima Kokabi
- Division of Interventional Radiology and Image-Guided Medicine, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA; (T.S.); (N.N.); (M.X.); (Z.B.); (B.M.)
- Emory University Hospital Midtown, 550 Peachtree Street NE, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +1-404-686-8715; Fax: +1-404-686-0104
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Triviño-Ibáñez EM, Pardo Moreno P, Ciampi Dopazo JJ, Ramos-Font C, Ruiz Villaverde G, González-Flores E, Navarro Vergara PF, Rashki M, Gómez-Río M, Rodríguez-Fernández A. Biomarkers associated with survival and favourable outcome of radioembolization with yttrium-90 glass microspheres for colon cancer liver metastases: Single centre experience. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2021; 41:231-238. [PMID: 34454892 DOI: 10.1016/j.remnie.2021.08.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Accepted: 05/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the therapeutic effectiveness and safety of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with Yttrium-90 in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases and to evaluate the prognostic value of different biomarkers. MATERIAL AND METHODS This prospective longitudinal study enrolled consecutive patients with CRC liver metastases treated with TARE between November 2015 and june 2020. The therapeutic response at three and six months (RECIST1.1 criteria) and the relationship of biomarkers with therapeutic response, by calculating objective tumor response rates (ORR) and disease control (DCR), and overall survival (OS) and progression-free (PFS). RESULTS Thirty TAREs were performed in 23 patients (mean age, 61.61 ± 9.13 years; 56.5% male). At three months, the objective response rate (ORR) was 16.7% and the disease control rate (DCR) 53.3%. At six months, the disease progressed in 80%. The ORR and DCR were significantly associated with age at diagnosis (P = 0.047), previous bevacizumab treatment (P = 0.008), pre-TARE haemoglobin (P = 0.008), NLR (P = 0.040), pre-TARE albumin (P = 0.012), pre-TARE ALT (P = 0.023) and tumour-absorbed dose > 115 Gy (P = 0.033). Median overall survival (OS) was 12 months (95% CI, 4.75-19.25 months) and median progression-free survival (PFS) 3 months (95% CI, 2.41-3.59). OS was significantly associated with primary tumour resection (P = 0.019), KRAS mutation (HR: 5.15; P = 0.024), pre-TARE haemoglobin (HR: 0.50; p = 0.009), pre-TARE NLR (HR: 1.65; P = 0.005) and PLR (HR: 1.01; P = 0.042). CONCLUSION TARE prognosis and therapeutic response were predicted by different biomarkers, ranging from biochemical parameters to tumour dosimetrics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M Triviño-Ibáñez
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, Spain.
| | - P Pardo Moreno
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - J J Ciampi Dopazo
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - C Ramos-Font
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, Spain
| | - G Ruiz Villaverde
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - E González-Flores
- Servicio de Oncología Médica, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - P F Navarro Vergara
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - M Rashki
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
| | - M Gómez-Río
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, Spain
| | - A Rodríguez-Fernández
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Triviño-Ibáñez EM, Pardo Moreno P, Ciampi Dopazo JJ, Ramos-Font C, Ruiz Villaverde G, González-Flores E, Navarro Vergara PF, Rashki M, Gómez-Río M, Rodríguez-Fernández A. Biomarkers associated with survival and favourable outcome of radioembolization with yttrium-90 glass microspheres for colon cancer liver metastases: Single centre experience. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2021; 41:S2253-654X(21)00129-3. [PMID: 34294586 DOI: 10.1016/j.remn.2021.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Revised: 05/21/2021] [Accepted: 05/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
OBJETIVE To determine the therapeutic effectiveness and safety of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with Yttrium-90 in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases and to evaluate the prognostic value of different biomarkers. MATERIAL AND METHODS This prospective longitudinal study enrolled consecutive patients with CRC liver metastases treated with TARE between November 2015 and june 2020. The therapeutic response at three and six months (RECIST1.1 criteria) and the relationship of biomarkers with therapeutic response, by calculating objective tumor response rates (ORR) and disease control (DCR), and overall survival (OS) and progression-free (PFS). RESULTS Thirty TAREs were performed in 23 patients (mean age, 61,61±9,13 years; 56,5% male). At three months, the objective response rate (ORR) was 16,7% and the disease control rate (DCR) 53,3%. At six months, the disease progressed in 80%. The ORR and DCR were significantly associated with age at diagnosis (P=.047), previous bevacizumab treatment (P=.008), pre-TARE haemoglobin (P=.008), NLR (P=.040), pre-TARE albumin (P=.012), pre-TARE ALT (P=.023) and tumour-absorbed dose>115Gy (P=.033). Median overall survival (OS) was 12 months (95% CI, 4.75-19.25 months) and median progression-free survival (PFS) 3 months (95% CI, 2.41-3.59). OS was significantly associated with primary tumour resection (P=.019), KRAS mutation (HR: 5.15; P=.024), pre-TARE haemoglobin (HR: .50; p=.009), pre-TARE NLR (HR: 1.65; P=.005) and PLR (HR: 1.01; P=.042). CONCLUSION TARE prognosis and therapeutic response were predicted by different biomarkers, ranging from biochemical parameters to tumour dosimetrics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M Triviño-Ibáñez
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, España.
| | - P Pardo Moreno
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España
| | - J J Ciampi Dopazo
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España
| | - C Ramos-Font
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, España
| | - G Ruiz Villaverde
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España
| | - E González-Flores
- Servicio de Oncología Médica, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España
| | - P F Navarro Vergara
- Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España
| | - M Rashki
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España
| | - M Gómez-Río
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, España
| | - A Rodríguez-Fernández
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, España; IBS, Granada Bio-Health Research Institute, Granada, España
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Seidensticker M, Fabritius MP, Beller J, Seidensticker R, Todica A, Ilhan H, Pech M, Heinze C, Powerski M, Damm R, Weiss A, Rueckel J, Omari J, Amthauer H, Ricke J. Impact of Pharmaceutical Prophylaxis on Radiation-Induced Liver Disease Following Radioembolization. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13091992. [PMID: 33919073 PMCID: PMC8122451 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13091992] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Accepted: 04/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Radioembolization has failed to prove survival benefit in randomized trials, and, depending on various factors including tumor biology, response rates may vary considerably. Studies showed positive correlations between survival and absorbed tumor dose. Therefore, increasing currently prescribed tumor doses may be favorable for improving patient outcomes. The dominant limiting factor for increasing RE dose prescriptions is the relatively low tolerance of liver parenchyma to radiation with the possible consequence of a radiation-induced liver disease. Advances in RILD prevention may help increasing tolerable radiation doses to improve patient outcomes. Our study aimed to evaluate the impact of post-therapeutic RILD-prophylaxis in a cohort of intensely pretreated liver metastatic breast cancer patients. The results of this study as well as pathophysiological considerations warrant further investigations of RILD prophylaxis to increase dose prescriptions in radioembolization. Abstract Background: Radioembolization (RE) with yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres yields heterogeneous response rates in with primary or secondary liver cancer. Radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) is a potentially life-threatening complication with higher prevalence in cirrhotics or patients exposed to previous chemotherapies. Advances in RILD prevention may help increasing tolerable radiation doses to improve patient outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of post-therapeutic RILD-prophylaxis in a cohort of intensely pretreated liver metastatic breast cancer patients; Methods: Ninety-three patients with liver metastases of breast cancer received RE between 2007 and 2016. All Patients received RILD prophylaxis for 8 weeks post-RE. From January 2014, RILD prophylaxis was changed from ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) and prednisolone (standard prophylaxis [SP]; n = 59) to pentoxifylline (PTX), UDCA and low-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (modified prophylaxis (MP); n = 34). The primary endpoint was toxicity including symptoms of RILD; Results: Dose exposure of normal liver parenchyma was higher in the modified vs. standard prophylaxis group (47.2 Gy (17.8–86.8) vs. 40.2 Gy (12.5–83.5), p = 0.017). All grade RILD events (mild: bilirubin ≥ 21 µmol/L (but <30 μmol/L); severe: (bilirubin ≥ 30 µmol/L and ascites)) were observed more frequently in the SP group than in the MP group, albeit without significance (7/59 vs. 1/34; p = 0.140). Severe RILD occurred in the SP group only (n = 2; p > 0.1). ALBI grade increased in 16.7% patients in the MP and in 27.1% patients in the SP group, respectively (group difference not significant); Conclusions: At established dose levels, mild or severe RILD events proved rare in our cohort. RILD prophylaxis with PTX, UDCA and LMWH appears to have an independent positive impact on OS in patients with metastatic breast cancer and may reduce the frequency and severity of RILD. Results of this study as well as pathophysiological considerations warrant further investigations of RILD prophylaxis presumably targeting combinations of anticoagulation (MP) and antiinflammation (SP) to increase dose prescriptions in radioembolization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Max Seidensticker
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; (R.S.); (J.R.); (J.R.)
- Correspondence: (M.S.); (M.P.F.)
| | - Matthias Philipp Fabritius
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; (R.S.); (J.R.); (J.R.)
- Correspondence: (M.S.); (M.P.F.)
| | - Jannik Beller
- Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke Universitätsklinikum, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (J.B.); (M.P.); (C.H.); (M.P.); (R.D.); (A.W.); (J.O.)
| | - Ricarda Seidensticker
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; (R.S.); (J.R.); (J.R.)
| | - Andrei Todica
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; (A.T.); (H.I.)
| | - Harun Ilhan
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; (A.T.); (H.I.)
| | - Maciej Pech
- Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke Universitätsklinikum, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (J.B.); (M.P.); (C.H.); (M.P.); (R.D.); (A.W.); (J.O.)
| | - Constanze Heinze
- Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke Universitätsklinikum, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (J.B.); (M.P.); (C.H.); (M.P.); (R.D.); (A.W.); (J.O.)
| | - Maciej Powerski
- Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke Universitätsklinikum, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (J.B.); (M.P.); (C.H.); (M.P.); (R.D.); (A.W.); (J.O.)
| | - Robert Damm
- Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke Universitätsklinikum, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (J.B.); (M.P.); (C.H.); (M.P.); (R.D.); (A.W.); (J.O.)
| | - Alexander Weiss
- Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke Universitätsklinikum, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (J.B.); (M.P.); (C.H.); (M.P.); (R.D.); (A.W.); (J.O.)
| | - Johannes Rueckel
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; (R.S.); (J.R.); (J.R.)
| | - Jazan Omari
- Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke Universitätsklinikum, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (J.B.); (M.P.); (C.H.); (M.P.); (R.D.); (A.W.); (J.O.)
| | - Holger Amthauer
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany;
| | - Jens Ricke
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich, Germany; (R.S.); (J.R.); (J.R.)
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Kwan J, Pua U. Review of Intra-Arterial Therapies for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13061371. [PMID: 33803606 PMCID: PMC8003062 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13061371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Revised: 03/14/2021] [Accepted: 03/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Colorectal cancer liver metastasis occurs in more than 50% of patients with colorectal cancer and is thought to be the most common cause of death from this cancer. The mainstay of treatment for inoperable liver metastasis has been combination systemic chemotherapy with or without the addition of biological targeted therapy with a goal for disease downstaging, for potential curative resection, or more frequently, for disease control. For patients with dominant liver metastatic disease or limited extrahepatic disease, liver-directed intra-arterial therapies including hepatic arterial chemotherapy infusion, chemoembolization and radioembolization are alternative treatment strategies that have shown promising results, most commonly in the salvage setting in patients with chemo-refractory disease. In recent years, their role in the first-line setting in conjunction with concurrent systemic chemotherapy has also been explored. This review aims to provide an update on the current evidence regarding liver-directed intra-arterial treatment strategies and to discuss potential trends for the future. Abstract The liver is frequently the most common site of metastasis in patients with colorectal cancer, occurring in more than 50% of patients. While surgical resection remains the only potential curative option, it is only eligible in 15–20% of patients at presentation. In the past two decades, major advances in modern chemotherapy and personalized biological agents have improved overall survival in patients with unresectable liver metastasis. For patients with dominant liver metastatic disease or limited extrahepatic disease, liver-directed intra-arterial therapies such as hepatic arterial chemotherapy infusion, chemoembolization and radioembolization are treatment strategies which are increasingly being considered to improve local tumor response and to reduce systemic side effects. Currently, these therapies are mostly used in the salvage setting in patients with chemo-refractory disease. However, their use in the first-line setting in conjunction with systemic chemotherapy as well as to a lesser degree, in a neoadjuvant setting, for downstaging to resection have also been investigated. Furthermore, some clinicians have considered these therapies as a temporizing tool for local disease control in patients undergoing a chemotherapy ‘holiday’ or acting as a bridge in patients between different lines of systemic treatment. This review aims to provide an update on the current evidence regarding liver-directed intra-arterial treatment strategies and to discuss potential trends for the future.
Collapse
|
21
|
Piasecki P, Majewska A, Narloch J, Maciak M, Brodaczewska K, Kuc M, Was H, Wierzbicki M, Brzozowski K, Ziecina P, Mazurek A, Dziuk M, Iller E, Kieda C. A new in vitro model applied 90Y microspheres to study the effects of low dose beta radiation on colorectal cancer cell line in various oxygenation conditions. Sci Rep 2021; 11:4472. [PMID: 33627727 PMCID: PMC7904911 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-84000-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2020] [Accepted: 02/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
We propose a new in vitro model to assess the impact of 90Y-microspheres derived low-dose beta radiation on colorectal cancer cell line under various oxygenation conditions that mimic the tumor environment. Cancer cells (HCT116) proliferation was assessed using Alamar Blue (AB) assay after 48, 72, and 96 h. FLUKA code assessed changes in cancer cell populations relative to the absorbed dose. In normoxia, mitochondrial activity measured by Alamar Blue after 48–72 h was significantly correlated with the number of microspheres (48 h: r = 0.87 and 72 h: r = 0.89, p < 0.05) and absorbed dose (48 h: r = 0.87 and 72 h: r = 0.7, p < 0.05). In hypoxia, the coefficients were r = 0.43 for both the number of spheres and absorbed dose and r = 0.45, r = 0.47, respectively. Impediment of cancer cell proliferation depended on the absorbed dose. Doses below 70 Gy could reduce colorectal cancer cell proliferation in vitro. Hypoxia induced a higher resistance to radiation than that observed under normoxic conditions. Hypoxia and radiation induced senescence in cultured cells. The new in vitro model is useful for the assessment of 90Y radioembolization effects at the micro-scale.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Piotr Piasecki
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, Szaserow 128, 01-141, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Aleksandra Majewska
- Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Innovative Therapies, Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland.,Postgraduate School of Molecular Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Jerzy Narloch
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, Szaserow 128, 01-141, Warsaw, Poland.
| | - Maciej Maciak
- Radiological Metrology and Biomedical Physics Division, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock, Poland
| | - Klaudia Brodaczewska
- Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Innovative Therapies, Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Michal Kuc
- Radiological Metrology and Biomedical Physics Division, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock, Poland
| | - Halina Was
- Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Innovative Therapies, Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Marek Wierzbicki
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, Szaserow 128, 01-141, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Krzysztof Brzozowski
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, Szaserow 128, 01-141, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Piotr Ziecina
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, Szaserow 128, 01-141, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Andrzej Mazurek
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Miroslaw Dziuk
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Edward Iller
- POLATOM Radioisotope Centre, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock, Poland
| | - Claudine Kieda
- Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Innovative Therapies, Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Yttrium-90 Hepatic Radioembolization for Advanced Chemorefractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Survival Outcomes Based on Right- Versus Left-Sided Primary Tumor Location. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021; 217:1141-1152. [PMID: 33594907 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.20.25315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND. Primary colon cancer location affects survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Outcomes based on primary tumor location after salvage hepatic radioembolization with 90Y resin microspheres are not well studied. OBJECTIVE. The objectives of this study are to assess the survival outcomes of patients with advanced chemorefractory mCRC treated with 90Y radioembolization, as stratified by primary tumor location, and to explore potential factors that are predictive of survival. METHODS. A total of 99 patients who had progressive mCRC liver metastases while receiving systemic therapy and who were treated with 90Y radioembolization at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. For 89 patients, tumor response on the first imaging follow-up examination (CT or MRI performed at a mean [± SD] of 1.9 ± 0.9 months after 90Y radioembolization) was evaluated using RECIST. Overall survival (OS), OS after 90Y radioembolization, and hepatic progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Outcomes and associations of outcomes with tumor response were compared between patients with left- and right-sided tumors. RESULTS. A total of 74 patients had left-sided colon cancer, and 25 patients had right-sided colon cancer. Median OS from the time of mCRC diagnosis was 37.2 months, median OS after 90Y radioembolization was 5.8 months, and median hepatic PFS was 3.3 months. Based on RECIST, progressive disease on first imaging follow-up was observed in 38 patients (43%) after 90Y radioembolization and was associated with shorter OS after 90Y radioembolization compared with observation of disease control on first imaging follow-up (4.0 vs 10.5 months; p < .001). Patients with right-sided primary tumors showed decreased median OS after 90Y radioembolization compared with patients with left-sided primary tumors (5.4 vs 6.2 months; p = .03). Right- and left-sided primary tumors showed no significant difference in RECIST tumor response, hepatic PFS, or extrahepatic disease progression (p > .05). Median survival after 90Y radioembolization was significantly lower among patients with progressive disease than among those with disease control in the group with left-sided primary tumors (4.2 vs 13.9 months; p < .001); however, this finding was not observed in the group with right-sided primary tumors (3.3 vs 7.2 months; p = .05). CONCLUSION. Right-sided primary tumors were independently associated with decreased survival among patients with chemorefractory mCRC after 90Y radioembolization, despite these patients having a similar RECIST tumor response, hepatic PFS, and extrahepatic disease progression compared with patients with left-sided primary tumors. CLINICAL IMPACT. Primary colon cancer location impacts outcomes after salvage 90Y radioembolization and may help guide patient selection.
Collapse
|
23
|
Das S, Berlin J. Systemic Therapy Improvements Will Render Locoregional Treatments Obsolete for Patients with Cancer with Liver Metastases. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2021; 30:189-204. [PMID: 33220805 PMCID: PMC7684942 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2020.08.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Hepatic metastases are a major cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with cancer. Apart from curative resection, which offers patients the potential for long-term survival, an array of locoregional therapies, with limited evidence of improving survival, are used to treat them. The authors use examples from the realm of gastrointestinal cancer, largely focusing on the experience of patients with neuroendocrine cancer, hepatobiliary cancer, and colorectal cancer, to suggest that current systemic therapies offer, at minimum, similar survival outcomes for patients compared with these locoregional approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Satya Das
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 777 Preston Research Building, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN 37232, USA.
| | - Jordan Berlin
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 777 Preston Research Building, 2220 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN 37232, USA. https://twitter.com/jordanberlin5
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
van Roekel C, Jongen JMJ, Smits MLJ, Elias SG, Koopman M, Kranenburg O, Borel Rinkes IHM, Lam MGEH. Mode of progression after radioembolization in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases. EJNMMI Res 2020; 10:107. [PMID: 32960390 PMCID: PMC7509032 DOI: 10.1186/s13550-020-00697-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2020] [Accepted: 09/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Radioembolization is an established treatment modality in colorectal cancer patients with liver-dominant disease in a salvage setting. Selection of patients who will benefit most is of vital importance. The aim of this study was to assess response (and mode of progression) at 3 months after radioembolization and the impact of baseline characteristics. Methods Three months after radioembolization with either yttrium-90 resin/glass or holmium-166, anatomic response, according to RECIST 1.1, was evaluated in 90 patients. Correlations between baseline characteristics and efficacy were evaluated. For more detailed analysis of progressive disease as a dismal clinical entity, distinction was made between intra- and extrahepatic progression, and between progression of existing metastases and new metastases. Results Forty-two patients (47%) had extrahepatic disease (up to five ≥ 1 cm lung nodules, and ≤ 2 cm lymph nodes) at baseline. No patients showed complete response, 5 (5.5%) patients had partial response, 16 (17.8%) had stable disease, and 69 (76.7%) had progressive disease. Most progressive patients (67/69; 97%) had new metastases (intra-hepatic N = 11, extrahepatic N = 32; or both N = 24). Significantly fewer patients had progressive disease in the group of patients presenting without extrahepatic metastases at baseline (63% versus 93%; p = 0.0016). Median overall survival in patients with extrahepatic disease was 6.5 months, versus 10 months in patients without extrahepatic disease at baseline (hazard ratio 1.79, 95%CI 1.24–2.57). Conclusions Response at 3-month follow-up and survival were heavily influenced by new metastases. Patients with extrahepatic disease at baseline had a worse outcome compared to patients without.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caren van Roekel
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Jennifer M J Jongen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Endocrine and GI Surgery, Cancer Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten L J Smits
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Sjoerd G Elias
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Onno Kranenburg
- Division of Biomedical Genetics, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Inne H M Borel Rinkes
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Endocrine and GI Surgery, Cancer Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marnix G E H Lam
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Klimkowski S, Baker JC, Brown DB. Red Flags, Pitfalls, and Cautions in Y90 Radiotherapy. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2019; 22:63-69. [PMID: 31079712 DOI: 10.1053/j.tvir.2019.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Radioembolization with yttrium-90 (Y90) microspheres is increasingly used to palliate patients with liver-dominant malignancy. With appropriate patient selection, this outpatient treatment is efficacious with limited toxicity profile. This article reviews common scenarios that can present in daily practice including evaluation of liver functions, evaluation of previous therapies, integrating Y90 into ongoing systemic therapy, determining performance status, and considering retreatment for patients who have already undergone Y90 who have hepatic dominant progression. Finally, we address the importance of evaluating tumors in potential watershed zones to maximize treatment response by using c-arm computed tomography. Many of these potential variables can overlap in an individual patient. By considering these factors individually, the consulting Interventional Radiologist can present a thorough treatment plan with a full description of expected outcomes and toxicities to clinic patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sergio Klimkowski
- The Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN
| | - Jennifer C Baker
- The Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN
| | - Daniel B Brown
- The Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN; The Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Chauhan N, Mulcahy MF, Salem R, Benson Iii AB, Boucher E, Bukovcan J, Cosgrove D, Laframboise C, Lewandowski RJ, Master F, El-Rayes B, Strosberg JR, Sze DY, Sharma RA. TheraSphere Yttrium-90 Glass Microspheres Combined With Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone in Second-Line Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma of the Liver: Protocol for the EPOCH Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial. JMIR Res Protoc 2019; 8:e11545. [PMID: 30664496 PMCID: PMC6354199 DOI: 10.2196/11545] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2018] [Revised: 11/09/2018] [Accepted: 11/09/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers and causes of cancer-related death. Up to approximately 70% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have metastases to the liver at initial diagnosis. Second-line systemic treatment in mCRC can prolong survival after development of disease progression during or after first-line treatment and in those who are intolerant to first-line treatment. Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with TheraSphere yttrium-90 (90Y) glass microspheres combined with second-line therapy in patients with mCRC of the liver who had disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy. Methods EPOCH is an open-label, prospective, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial being conducted at up to 100 sites in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Asia. Eligible patients have mCRC of the liver and disease progression after first-line chemotherapy with either an oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based regimen and are eligible for second-line chemotherapy with the alternate regimen. Patients were randomized 1:1 to the TARE group (chemotherapy with TARE in place of the second chemotherapy infusion and subsequent resumption of chemotherapy) or the control group (chemotherapy alone). The addition of targeted agents is permitted. The primary end points are progression-free survival and hepatic progression-free survival. The study objective will be considered achieved if at least one primary end point is statistically significant. Secondary end points are overall survival, time to symptomatic progression defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 2 or higher, objective response rate, disease control rate, quality-of-life assessment by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Cancer questionnaire, and adverse events. The study is an adaptive trial, comprising a group sequential design with 2 interim analyses with a planned maximum of 420 patients. The study is designed to detect a 2.5-month increase in median progression-free survival, from 6 months in the control group to 8.5 months in the TARE group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71), and a 3.5-month increase in median hepatic progression-free survival time, from 6.5 months in the control group to 10 months in the TARE group (HR 0.65). On the basis of simulations, the power to detect the target difference in either progression-free survival or hepatic progression-free survival is >90%, and the power to detect the target difference in each end point alone is >80%. Results Patient enrollment ended in October 2018. The first interim analysis in June 2018 resulted in continuation of the study without any changes. Conclusions The EPOCH study may contribute toward the establishment of the role of combination therapy with TARE and oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of mCRC of the liver. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01483027; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01483027 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/734A6PAYW) International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR1-10.2196/11545
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil Chauhan
- Research and Development, BTG International group companies, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mary F Mulcahy
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Riad Salem
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.,Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.,Division of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Al B Benson Iii
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.,Northwestern Medical Group, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Eveline Boucher
- Research and Development, BTG International group companies, London, United Kingdom
| | - Janet Bukovcan
- Research and Development, BTG International group companies, London, United Kingdom
| | - David Cosgrove
- Division of Medical Oncology, Vancouver Cancer Center, Compass Oncology, Vancouver, WA, United States
| | - Chantal Laframboise
- Research and Development, BTG International group companies, London, United Kingdom
| | - Robert J Lewandowski
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.,Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.,Division of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Fayaz Master
- Research and Development, BTG International group companies, London, United Kingdom
| | - Bassel El-Rayes
- Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.,Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | | | - Daniel Y Sze
- Interventional Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Ricky A Sharma
- National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, UCL Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Tsitskari M, Filippiadis D, Kostantos C, Palialexis K, Zavridis P, Kelekis N, Brountzos E. The role of interventional oncology in the treatment of colorectal cancer liver metastases. Ann Gastroenterol 2018; 32:147-155. [PMID: 30837787 PMCID: PMC6394269 DOI: 10.20524/aog.2018.0338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2018] [Accepted: 11/20/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of death both in Europe and worldwide. Unfortunately, 20-25% of patients with colorectal cancer already have metastases at the time of diagnosis, while 50-60% of the remainder will develop metastases later during the course of the disease. Although hepatic excision is the first-line treatment for patients with liver-limited colorectal metastases and is reported to prolong the survival of these patients, few patients are candidates. Locoregional therapy encompasses minimally invasive techniques practiced by interventional radiology. Most widely used locoregional therapies include ablative treatments (radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation) and transcatheter intra-arterial therapies (transarterial chemoembolization, and radioembolization with yttrium-90).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Tsitskari
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitris Filippiadis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Chrysostomos Kostantos
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Kostantinos Palialexis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Periklis Zavridis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Nikolaos Kelekis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Elias Brountzos
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Tsitskari M, Filippiadis D, Kostantos C, Palialexis K, Zavridis P, Kelekis N, Brountzos E. The role of interventional oncology in the treatment of colorectal cancer liver metastases. Ann Gastroenterol 2018. [PMID: 30837787 DOI: 10.20524/aog.2019.0338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of death both in Europe and worldwide. Unfortunately, 20-25% of patients with colorectal cancer already have metastases at the time of diagnosis, while 50-60% of the remainder will develop metastases later during the course of the disease. Although hepatic excision is the first-line treatment for patients with liver-limited colorectal metastases and is reported to prolong the survival of these patients, few patients are candidates. Locoregional therapy encompasses minimally invasive techniques practiced by interventional radiology. Most widely used locoregional therapies include ablative treatments (radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation) and transcatheter intra-arterial therapies (transarterial chemoembolization, and radioembolization with yttrium-90).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Tsitskari
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitris Filippiadis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Chrysostomos Kostantos
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Kostantinos Palialexis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Periklis Zavridis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Nikolaos Kelekis
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| | - Elias Brountzos
- Second Department of Radiology, Unit of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Levy J, Zuckerman J, Garfinkle R, Acuna SA, Touchette J, Vanounou T, Pelletier JS. Intra-arterial therapies for unresectable and chemorefractory colorectal cancer liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 2018; 20:905-915. [PMID: 29887263 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2018.04.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2018] [Revised: 04/17/2018] [Accepted: 04/21/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A large proportion of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) not amenable to curative liver resection will progress on systemic therapy. Intra-arterial therapies (IAT) including conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE), drug eluting beads (DEB-TACE) and yttrium-90 radioembolization (Y-90) are indicated to prolong survival and palliate symptoms. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the survival benefit and radiologic response of three intra-arterial therapies in patients with chemorefractory and unresectable CRCLM. METHODS A systematic search for eligible references in the Cochrane Library and the EMBASE, MEDLINE and TRIP databases from January 2000 to November 2016 was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the MINORS scale. One-year overall survival rates and RECIST responder rates were pooled using inverse-variance weighted random-effects models. Overall survival outcomes were collected according to transformed pooled median survivals from first IAT with a subgroup analysis of patients with extrahepatic disease. RESULTS Twenty-three prospective studies were included and analyzed: 5 cTACE (n = 746), 5 DEB-TACE (n = 222) and 13 Y-90 (n = 615). All but five were clinical trials. Eleven of 13 Y-90 studies were industry funded. Pooled RECIST response rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were: cTACE 23% (9.7, 36), DEB-TACE 36% (0, 73) and Y-90 23% (11, 34). The pooled 1-year survival rates with CI were: cTACE, 70% (49, 87), DEB-TACE, 80% (74, 86) and Y-90, 41% (28, 54). Transformed pooled median survivals from first IAT and ranges for cTACE, DEB-TACE and Y-90 were 16 months (9.0-23), 16 months (7.3-25) and 12 months (7.0-15), respectively. Significant heterogeneity in inclusion criteria and reporting of confounders, including previous therapy, tumor burden and post-IAT therapy, precluded statistical comparisons between the three therapies. CONCLUSION Methodological and statistical heterogeneity precluded consensus on the optimal treatment strategy. Given the common use and significant cost of radioembolization in this setting, a more robust prospective comparative trial is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jordan Levy
- University of Toronto Division of General Surgery, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Toronto Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | - Jesse Zuckerman
- University of Toronto Division of General Surgery, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Richard Garfinkle
- Sir Mortimer B Davis Jewish General Hospital, Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Sergio A Acuna
- University of Toronto Division of General Surgery, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Toronto Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Jacynthe Touchette
- Sir Mortimer B Davis Jewish General Hospital Health Sciences Library, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Tsafrir Vanounou
- Sir Mortimer B Davis Jewish General Hospital, Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Jean-Sebastien Pelletier
- Sir Mortimer B Davis Jewish General Hospital, Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Montreal, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Kurilova I, Beets-Tan RGH, Flynn J, Gönen M, Ulaner G, Petre EN, Edward Boas F, Ziv E, Yarmohammadi H, Klompenhouwer EG, Cercek A, Kemeny NA, Sofocleous CT. Factors Affecting Oncologic Outcomes of 90Y Radioembolization of Heavily Pre-Treated Patients With Colon Cancer Liver Metastases. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2018; 18:8-18. [PMID: 30297264 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2018.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2018] [Revised: 08/22/2018] [Accepted: 08/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of overall (OS) and liver progression-free survival (LPFS) following Yttrium-90 radioembolization (RAE) of heavily pretreated patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CLM), as well as to create and validate a predictive nomogram for OS. MATERIALS AND METHODS Metabolic, anatomic, laboratory, pathologic, genetic, primary disease, and procedure-related factors, as well as pre- and post-RAE therapies in 103 patients with CLM treated with RAE from September 15, 2009 to March 21, 2017 were analyzed. LPFS was defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors 1.1 and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria. Prognosticators of OS and LPFS were selected using univariate Cox regression, adjusted for clustering and competing risk analysis (for LPFS), and subsequently tested in multivariate analysis (MVA). The nomogram was built using R statistical software and internally validated using bootstrap resampling. RESULTS Patients received RAE at a median of 30.9 months (range, 3.4-161.7 months) after detection of CLM. The median OS and LPFS were 11.3 months (95% confidence interval, 7.9-15.1 months) and 4 months (95% confidence interval, 3.3-4.8 months), respectively. Of the 40 parameters tested, 6 were independently associated with OS in MVA. These baseline parameters included number of extrahepatic disease sites (P < .001), carcinoembryonic antigen (P < .001), albumin (P = .005), alanine aminotransferase level (P < .001), tumor differentiation level (P < .001), and the sum of the 2 largest tumor diameters (P < .001). The 1-year OS of patients with total points of < 25 versus > 80 was 90% and 10%, respectively. Bootstrap resampling showed good discrimination (optimism corrected c-index = 0.745) and calibration (mean absolute prediction error = 0.299) of the nomogram. Only baseline maximum standardized uptake value was significant in MVA for LPFS prediction (P < .001; SHR = 1.06). CONCLUSION The developed nomogram included 6 pre-RAE parameters and provided good prediction of survival post-RAE in heavily pretreated patients. Baseline maximum standardized uptake value was the single significant predictor of LPFS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ieva Kurilova
- Department of Interventional Oncology/Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Jessica Flynn
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Mithat Gönen
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Gary Ulaner
- Molecular Imaging and Therapy Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Elena N Petre
- Department of Interventional Oncology/Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - F Edward Boas
- Department of Interventional Oncology/Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Etay Ziv
- Department of Interventional Oncology/Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Hooman Yarmohammadi
- Department of Interventional Oncology/Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | - Andrea Cercek
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Nancy A Kemeny
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Constantinos T Sofocleous
- Department of Interventional Oncology/Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Weiner AA, Gui B, Newman NB, Nosher JL, Yousseff F, Lu SE, Foltz GM, Carpizo D, Lowenthal J, Zuckerman DA, Benson B, Olsen JR, Jabbour SK, Parikh PJ. Predictors of Survival after Yttrium-90 Radioembolization for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2018; 29:1094-1100. [PMID: 29754852 PMCID: PMC10905616 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2018.02.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2017] [Revised: 02/14/2018] [Accepted: 02/17/2018] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify clinical parameters that are prognostic for improved overall survival (OS) after yttrium-90 radioembolization (RE) in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 131 patients who underwent RE for liver metastases from CRC, treated at 2 academic centers, were reviewed. Twenty-one baseline pretreatment clinical factors were analyzed in relation to OS by the Kaplan-Meier method along with log-rank tests and univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS The median OS from first RE procedure was 10.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.4-12.7 months). Several pretreatment factors, including lower carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA; ≤20 ng/mL), lower aspartate transaminase (AST; ≤40 IU/L), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) <5, and absence of extrahepatic disease at baseline were associated with significantly improved OS after RE, compared with high CEA (>20 ng/mL), high AST (>40 IU/L), NLR ≥5, and extrahepatic metastases (P values of <.001, <.001, .0001, and .04, respectively). On multivariate analysis, higher CEA, higher AST, NLR ≥5, extrahepatic disease, and larger volume of liver metastases remained independently associated with risk of death (hazard ratios of 1.63, 2.06, 2.22, 1.48, and 1.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS The prognosis of patients with metastases from CRC is impacted by a complex set of clinical parameters. This analysis of pretreatment factors identified lower AST, lower CEA, lower NLR, and lower tumor burden (intra- or extrahepatic) to be independently associated with higher survival after hepatic RE. Optimal selection of patients with CRC liver metastases may improve survival rates after administration of yttrium-90.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashley A Weiner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Bin Gui
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Neil B Newman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - John L Nosher
- Department of Radiology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Fady Yousseff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave, St Louis, Missouri 63110
| | - Shou-En Lu
- Rutgers School of Public Health, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Gretchen M Foltz
- Department of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave, St Louis, Missouri 63110
| | - Darren Carpizo
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Jonathan Lowenthal
- Department of Radiology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Darryl A Zuckerman
- Department of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave, St Louis, Missouri 63110
| | - Ben Benson
- Department of Radiology, Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx, New York
| | - Jeffrey R Olsen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado
| | - Salma K Jabbour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Parag J Parikh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave, St Louis, Missouri 63110.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Piasecki P, Narloch J, Brzozowski K, Zięcina P, Mazurek A, Budzyńska A, Korniluk J, Dziuk M. The Predictive Value of SPECT/CT imaging in colorectal liver metastases response after 90Y-radioembolization. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0200488. [PMID: 29990342 PMCID: PMC6039046 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200488] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2018] [Accepted: 06/27/2018] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate a modified method of calculating the 99mTc/90Y tumor-to-normal-liver uptake ratio (mT/N) based on SPECT/CT imaging, for use in predicting the overall response of colorectal liver tumors after radioembolization. A modified phantom-based method of tumor-to-normal-liver ratio calculation was proposed and assessed. In contrast to the traditional method based on data gathered from the whole tumor, gamma counts are collected only from a 2D region of interest delineated in the SPECT/CT section with the longest tumor diameter (as specified in RECIST 1.1). The modified tumor-to-normal-liver ratio (mT/N1) and 90Y predicted tumor absorbed dose (PAD) were obtained based on 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT, and similarly the modified tumor-to-normal-liver ratio (mT/N2) and 90Y actual tumor absorbed dose (AAD) were calculated after 90Y-SPECT/CT. Tumor response was assessed on follow-up CTs. Using the newly proposed method, a total of 103 liver colorectal metastases in 21 patients who underwent radioembolization (between June 2009 and October 2015) were evaluated in pre-treatment CT scans and 99mTc-MAA-SPECT/CT scans and compared with post-treatment 90Y-SPECT/CT scans and follow-up CT scans. The results showed that the mT/N1 ratio (p = 0.012), PAD (p < 0.001) and AAD (p < 0.001) were predictors of tumor response after radioembolization. The time to progression was significantly lengthened for tumors with mT/N1 higher than 1.7 or PAD higher than 70 Gy. The risk of progression for tumors with mT/N1 lower than 1.7 or PAD below 70 Gy was significantly higher. The mT/N2 ratio had no significant correlation with treatment results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Piotr Piasecki
- Interventional Radiology Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
- * E-mail:
| | - Jerzy Narloch
- Interventional Radiology Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Krzysztof Brzozowski
- Interventional Radiology Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Piotr Zięcina
- Interventional Radiology Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Andrzej Mazurek
- Nuclear Medicine Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Anna Budzyńska
- Nuclear Medicine Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Jan Korniluk
- Oncology Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Mirosław Dziuk
- Nuclear Medicine Department of Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
O'Leary C, Greally M, McCaffrey J, Hughes P, Lawler LLP, O'Connell M, Geoghegan T, Farrelly C. Single-institution experience with selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) for the treatment of unresectable colorectal liver metastases. Ir J Med Sci 2018; 188:43-53. [PMID: 29511912 DOI: 10.1007/s11845-018-1773-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2017] [Accepted: 02/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Liver metastases are the commonest cause of death for patients with colorectal cancer. Growing evidence supports the use of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) in combination with conventional chemotherapy regimens for liver-only or liver-dominant unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. AIMS To measure and evaluate outcomes of the first 20 consecutive patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastasis selected for SIRT in addition to their chemotherapy at a single Irish institution. METHODS Retrospective case series was performed. Patient charts and medical records were reviewed. RESULTS All 20 patients (100%) selected for angiographic workup were subsequently successfully treated with radioembolization. All patients were discharged 1 day post-SIRT. At initial imaging evaluation, 12 (60%) had a partial response in their liver, 2 (10%) had stable disease, and 6 (30%) had liver-specific progressive disease. Median follow up was 10 months (range 6-26). At last follow up, 14 (70%) patients were alive and 6 (30%) deceased. Most recent imaging demonstrated 2 (10%) with a complete response, 7 (35%) had a partial response, 2 (10%) had stable disease, and 9 (45%) had progressive disease within their liver. One patient was downstaged to hepatic resection, and one with a complete hepatic response had his primary sigmoid tumor resected 11 months post-SIRT. CONCLUSIONS SIRT is a safe and effective therapy for certain patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases. This case series supports our opinion that selected patients should be offered SIRT in concert with their medical oncologist, concomitant with their chemotherapy. Larger multi-center studies are required to more clearly define the patient groups that will derive most benefit from SIRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cathal O'Leary
- Radiology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland
| | - Megan Greally
- Oncology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland
| | - John McCaffrey
- Oncology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland
| | - Peter Hughes
- Radiology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland
| | - Leo L P Lawler
- Radiology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland
| | - Martin O'Connell
- Radiology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland
| | - Tony Geoghegan
- Radiology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland
| | - Cormac Farrelly
- Radiology Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin, 7, Ireland.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Türk G, Eldem G, Kılıçkap S, Bozkurt FM, Salancı BV, Çil BE, Peynircioğlu B, Yalçın Ş, Balkancı F. Outcomes of Radioembolization in Patients with Chemorefractory Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis: a Single-Center Experience. J Gastrointest Cancer 2018; 50:236-243. [PMID: 29354877 DOI: 10.1007/s12029-018-0053-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of radioembolization with Yttrium-90 (Y-90) microspheres in patients with unresectable and chemorefractory colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRCLM). METHODS This single-center study included 43 patients (34 male, 9 female) who underwent radioembolization with Y-90 for unresectable, chemorefractory CRCLM between September 2008 and July 2014. Overall survival (OS), liver progression-free survival (LPFS), overall response rate (ORR), local disease control rate (LDCR), and relations of these parameters with patient disease characteristics were evaluated. OS and LPFS rates were compared according to microspheres. Survival rates were calculated with Kaplan-Meier method, and potential prognostic variables were evaluated on univariate analyses. RESULTS Post-procedural median OS was 12.8 months. LPFS was 5.6 months. ORR was 33%, LDCR was 67% on 3rd month follow-up. Low tumor burden (< 25%) was associated with higher median OS after radioembolization (< 25 vs > 25-50% p < 0.0001 and < 25 vs > 50% p = 0.005). Patients with left colon tumors exhibited significantly longer median OS after metastasis than right colon tumors (p = 0.046). Extrahepatic disease and synchronicity showed poorer survival parameters; however, the difference was not significant (p = 0.1 and p = 0.3, respectively). In subgroup analyses, the distribution of patient number and characteristics showed heterogeneity as number of patients with low tumor burden was higher in resin Y-90 group. Resin Y-90 group exhibited significantly higher median OS and LPFS compared to glass Y-90 group (16.5 vs. 7 months, p = 0.001; 6.73 vs. 3.38 months, p = 0.023, respectively). CONCLUSION Radioembolization is a safe local-regional treatment option in chemorefractory, inoperable CRCLM. Radioembolization at earlier stages may lead to more favorable results especially with lower tumor burden patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gamze Türk
- Department of Radiology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey. .,Department of Radiology, Kayseri Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey.
| | - Gonca Eldem
- Department of Radiology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | | | - Fani Murat Bozkurt
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Bilge Volkan Salancı
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Barbaros Erhan Çil
- Department of Radiology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Bora Peynircioğlu
- Department of Radiology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Şuayip Yalçın
- Hacettepe University Cancer Institute, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Ferhun Balkancı
- Department of Radiology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Griggs RKL, Pathak S, Poston G. An Overview of the Current Management of Bilobar Colorectal Liver Metastases. Indian J Surg Oncol 2017; 8:600-606. [PMID: 29203994 DOI: 10.1007/s13193-017-0686-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2016] [Accepted: 08/01/2017] [Indexed: 10/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Bilobar colorectal liver metastases (BCRLM) present a challenging scenario for liver surgeons globally. The following article aims to provide an overview of the different strategies which may be utilised in order to successfully manage advanced BCRLM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca K L Griggs
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Upper Maudlin Street, Bristol, BS2 8HW UK
| | - Samir Pathak
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Upper Maudlin Street, Bristol, BS2 8HW UK
| | - Graeme Poston
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, University Hospital Aintree, Longmoor Lane, Liverpool, L9 7AL UK
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Orwat KP, Beckham TH, Cooper SL, Ashenafi MS, Anderson MB, Guimaraes M, Yamada R, Marshall DT. Pretreatment albumin may aid in patient selection for intrahepatic Y-90 microsphere transarterial radioembolization (TARE) for malignancies of the liver. J Gastrointest Oncol 2017; 8:1072-1078. [PMID: 29299369 DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2017.06.18] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Hepatic malignancies are common including primary malignancies and metastases. Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) is an important treatment option. We reviewed safety and efficacy of (TARE) in our patients to identify factors that may impact treatment outcomes in a heterogeneous population. Methods All patients that received TARE at the Medical University of South Carolina from March 2006 through May of 2014 were included. Kaplan-Meier estimates on overall survival (OS) from date of first procedure are reported. Potential prognostic factors for OS were evaluated using log rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models. Results In the 114 patients that received TARE at our institution, median follow-up was 6.4 months (range, 0-86 months) with the following histologies: colorectal (CR) n=55, hepatocellular (HC) n=20, cholangiocarcinoma (CC) n=16, neuroendocrine (NE) n=12, breast (BR) n=6, other n=5. At least 1 line of prior systemic therapy was noted in 79% of patients. Median OS was significantly better with NE and BR histology, and in those with normal albumin levels. With an albumin >3.4 median OS was 10.3 months, but was only 3.1 months with an albumin <3 g/dL. Grade ≥2 toxicity was observed in 22 patients (19.3%) including 9 (7.9%) with Grade 3 and 1 (0.9%) with Grade 4 toxicity. Conclusions TARE is a relatively safe and effective treatment for intrahepatic malignancies. Patients with NE and BR histology as well as those with better hepatic synthetic function were associated with significantly better survival. Our data suggest that patients with albumin below 3 g/dL may not derive significant benefit from TARE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly P Orwat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Thomas H Beckham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Samuel Lewis Cooper
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Michael S Ashenafi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | | | - Marcelo Guimaraes
- Department of Radiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Ricardo Yamada
- Department of Radiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - David T Marshall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Boas FE, Bodei L, Sofocleous CT. Radioembolization of Colorectal Liver Metastases: Indications, Technique, and Outcomes. J Nucl Med 2017; 58:104S-111S. [PMID: 28864605 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.116.187229] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2017] [Accepted: 06/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Liver metastases are a major cause of death from colorectal cancer. Intraarterial therapy options for colorectal liver metastases include chemoinfusion via a hepatic arterial pump or port, irinotecan-loaded drug-eluting beads, and radioembolization using 90Y microspheres. Intraarterial therapy allows the delivery of a high dose of chemotherapy or radiation into liver tumors while minimizing the impact on liver parenchyma and avoiding systemic effects. Specificity in intraarterial therapy can be achieved both through preferential arterial flow to the tumor and through selective catheter positioning. In this review, we discuss indications, contraindications, preprocedure evaluation, activity prescription, follow-up, outcomes, and complications of radioembolization of colorectal liver metastases. Methods for preventing off-target embolization, increasing the specificity of microsphere delivery, and reducing the lung-shunt fraction are discussed. There are 2 types of 90Y microspheres: resin and glass. Because glass microspheres have a higher activity per particle, they can deliver a particular radiation dose with fewer particles, likely reducing embolic effects. Glass microspheres thus may be more suitable when early stasis or reflux is a concern, in the setting of hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein invasion, and for radiation segmentectomy. Because resin microspheres have a lower activity per particle, more particles are needed to deliver a particular radiation dose. Resin microspheres thus may be preferable for larger tumors and those with high arterial flow. In addition, resin microspheres have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for colorectal liver metastases, whereas institutional review board approval is required before glass microspheres can be used under a compassionate-use or research protocol. Finally, radiation segmentectomy involves delivering a calculated lobar activity of 90Y microspheres selectively to treat a tumor involving 1 or 2 liver segments. This technique administers a very high radiation dose and effectively causes the ablation of tumors that are too large or are in a location considered unsafe for thermal ablation. The selective delivery spares surrounding normal liver, reducing the risk of liver failure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Edward Boas
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; and
| | - Lisa Bodei
- Molecular Imaging and Therapy Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Constantinos T Sofocleous
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; and
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Ziv E, Bergen M, Yarmohammadi H, Boas FE, Petre EN, Sofocleous CT, Yaeger R, Solit DB, Solomon SB, Erinjeri JP. PI3K pathway mutations are associated with longer time to local progression after radioembolization of colorectal liver metastases. Oncotarget 2017; 8:23529-23538. [PMID: 28206962 PMCID: PMC5410324 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.15278] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2016] [Accepted: 01/16/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose To establish the relationship between common mutations in the MAPK and PI3K signaling pathways and local progression after radioembolization. Materials and Methods Retrospective review of a HIPAA-compliant institutional review-board approved database identified 40 patients with chemo-refractory colorectal liver metastases treated with radioembolization who underwent tumor genotyping for hotspot mutations in 6 key genes in the MAPK/PI3K pathways (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, MEK1, PIK3CA, and AKT1). Mutation status as well as clinical, tumor, and treatment variables were recorded. These factors were evaluated in relation to time to local progression (TTLP), which was calculated from time of radioembolization to first radiographic evidence of local progression. Predictors of outcome were identified using a proportional hazards model for both univariate and multivariate analysis with death as a competing risk. Results Sixteen patients (40%) had no mutations in either pathway, eighteen patients (45%) had mutations in the MAPK pathway, ten patients (25%) had mutations in the PI3K pathway and four patients (10%) had mutations in both pathways. The cumulative incidence of progression at 6 and 12 months was 33% and 55% for the PI3K mutated group compared with 76% and 92% in the PI3K wild type group. Mutation in the PI3K pathway was a significant predictor of longer TTLP in both univariate (p=0.031, sHR 0.31, 95% CI: 0.11-0.90) and multivariate (p=0.015, sHR=0.27, 95% CI: 0.096-0.77) analysis. MAPK pathway alterations were not associated with TTLP. Conclusions PI3K pathway mutation predicts longer time to local progression after radioembolization of colorectal liver metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Etay Ziv
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Michael Bergen
- Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, USA
| | - Hooman Yarmohammadi
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - F Ed Boas
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - E Nadia Petre
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Constantinos T Sofocleous
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Rona Yaeger
- Gastrointestinal Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - David B Solit
- Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.,Marie-Josee and Henry R. Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.,Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Stephen B Solomon
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Joseph P Erinjeri
- Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Sangha BS, Nimeiri H, Hickey R, Salem R, Lewandowski RJ. Radioembolization as a Treatment Strategy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer to the Liver: What Can We Learn from the SIRFLOX Trial? Curr Treat Options Oncol 2017; 17:26. [PMID: 27098532 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-016-0402-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT In the setting of liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC), radioembolization with yttrium-90 has been used to treat chemotherapy refractory disease with a growing interest to establish its efficacy in prospective trials combined with first- and second-line chemotherapy. SIRFLOX is an ongoing, multi-center, phase 3 randomized trial comparing first-line chemotherapy alone or in combination with yttrium-90 radioembolization in patients with CRC who have isolated liver metastases or liver-dominant metastases. Preliminary results from SIRFLOX demonstrate that radioembolization combined with first-line chemotherapy is safe and feasible. There was no significant difference in median overall progression-free survival (PFS) between the combined radioembolization-chemotherapy and chemotherapy-only arms (10.7 versus 10.2 months). Although the trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improved median PFS, there was a significant increase in the median hepatic PFS (20.5 versus 12.6 months; p = 0.02) favoring the combination arm. Thus, combining radioembolization with chemotherapy in the first-line setting may be most effective for liver-limited metastatic CRC. Since radioembolization targets liver disease, it is plausible that the trial failed to achieve an improvement in PFS given that 40 % of the SIRFLOX population had extra-hepatic disease. It is also possible that the overall median PFS may be a poor surrogate endpoint, and other endpoints like overall survival still needs to be delineated in this setting. In addition, it is crucial to document improvement or delay in time to deterioration in quality of life symptom endpoints in this population. SIRFLOX is the first of three prospective studies that assess the efficacy of adding radioembolization to first-line chemotherapy, and the combined data from these trials will provide the necessary power for an overall survival analysis. The final results of SIRFLOX will be eagerly awaited to determine if the increased hepatic PFS in preliminary data will translate to increased overall survival benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bippan Singh Sangha
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, 676 N. St. Clair, Suite 800, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA
| | - Halla Nimeiri
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Ryan Hickey
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, 676 N. St. Clair, Suite 800, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA
| | - Riad Salem
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, 676 N. St. Clair, Suite 800, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
- Division of Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Robert J Lewandowski
- Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, 676 N. St. Clair, Suite 800, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Fairchild AH, White SB. Decision Making in Interventional Oncology: Intra-arterial Therapies for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-Y90 and Chemoembolization. Semin Intervent Radiol 2017; 34:87-91. [PMID: 28579675 DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1601854] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States and the liver is the most common site of metastatic disease. The presence and extent of hepatic metastases are a major prognostic indicator. Although surgical resection is the accepted first-line therapy for colorectal liver metastasis, only 20 to 25% of patients are eligible for resection due to the extent and location of disease. This article discusses the current role of transarterial therapies in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra H Fairchild
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | - Sarah B White
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Shamimi-Noori S, Gonsalves CF, Shaw CM. Metastatic Liver Disease: Indications for Locoregional Therapy and Supporting Data. Semin Intervent Radiol 2017; 34:145-166. [PMID: 28579683 DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1602712] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Metastatic liver disease is a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Surgical resection is considered the only curative treatment, yet only a minority is eligible. Patients who present with unresectable disease are treated with systemic agents and/or locoregional therapies. The latter include thermal ablation and catheter-based transarterial interventions. Thermal ablation is reserved for those with limited tumor burden. It is used to downstage the disease to enable curative surgical resection, as an adjunct to surgery, or in select patients it is potentially curative. Transarterial therapies are indicated in those with more diffuse disease. The goals of care are to palliate symptoms and prolong survival. The indications and supporting data for thermal ablation and transarterial interventions are reviewed, technical and tumor factors that need to be considered prior to intervention are outlined, and finally several cases are presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan Shamimi-Noori
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Carin F Gonsalves
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Colette M Shaw
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Marsala A, Lee EW, Padia SA. Yttrium-90 Radioembolization for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Outcomes by Number of Lines of Therapy. Semin Intervent Radiol 2017; 34:116-120. [PMID: 28579679 DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1602711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Metastatic colorectal cancer represents the most common liver malignancy, and imparts a very poor prognosis for those who develop this disease. Unlike primary liver tumors such as hepatocellular carcinoma, which largely develops in patients with underlying cirrhosis, most metastatic liver tumor patients have normal underlying liver function. Owing to this, most will succumb to tumoral replacement of the liver rather than from underlying liver dysfunction. Radioembolization represents a treatment modality that can be used in multiple fashions to treat one or both lobes of the liver. Techniques depend on whether the procedure is used as first-line, second/third-line, or as salvage therapy. Outcomes and complications of radioembolization are presented in this article, as well as background information on colorectal cancer and systemic therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Marsala
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Edward W Lee
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Siddharth A Padia
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Prognostic value of pretreatment diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for outcome prediction of colorectal cancer liver metastases undergoing 90Y-microsphere radioembolization. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2017; 143:1531-1541. [PMID: 28317063 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-017-2395-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2017] [Accepted: 03/12/2017] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the clinical potential of pretreatment apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) for therapy response and outcome prediction in patients with liver-predominant metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) undergoing radioembolization with 90Yttrium-microspheres (90Y-RE). METHODS Forty-six consecutive patients with unresectable CRC liver metastases underwent standardized clinical DWI on a 1.5 T MR scanner prior to and 4-6 weeks after 90Y-RE. Pretreatment clinical parameters, ADC values derived from region-of-interest analysis, and the corresponding tumor sizes of three treated liver metastases per subject were recorded. Long-term tumor response to radioembolization was categorized into response (partial remission) and nonresponse (stable disease, progressive disease) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 (RECIST) 3 months after treatment. Associations between long-term tumor response and the clinical and imaging parameters were evaluated. The impact of pretreatment clinical and imaging parameters on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was further assessed by Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox-regression analyses. RESULTS Nonresponders had higher hepatic tumor burden (p = 0.021) and lower ADC values than patients responding to 90Y-RE, both pretreatment (986 ± 215 vs. 1162 ± 178; p = 0.036) and posttreatment (1180 ± 350 vs. 1598 ± 225; p = 0.002). ADC values higher than 935 × 10-6 mm2 (5 vs. 3 months; p = 0.022) and hepatic tumor burden ≤25% (6 vs. 3 months; p = 0.014) were associated with longer median PFS, whereas ADC >935 × 10-6 mm2 (14 vs. 6 months; p = 0.02), hepatic tumor burden ≤25% (14 vs. 6 months; p = 0.048), size of the largest metastasis <4.7 cm (18 vs. 7 months; p = 0.024), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score <1 (8 vs. 5 months; p = 0.045) were associated with longer median OS. On multivariate analysis, ADC >935 × 10-6 mm2 and hepatic tumor burden ≤25% remained prognostic factors for PFS, and ADC >935 × 10-6 mm2 and size of the largest metastasis <4.7 cm were independent predictors of OS. CONCLUSION Pretreatment ADC on DWI represents a valuable prognostic biomarker for predicting both the therapeutic efficacy and survival prognosis in CRC liver metastases treated by 90Y-RE, allowing risk stratification and potentially optimizing further treatment strategies.
Collapse
|
44
|
Abstract
Radioembolization (RE) is a relatively novel treatment modality for primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. Microspheres embedded with a β-emitting radioisotope are injected into the hepatic artery, resulting in microsphere deposition in the tumor arterioles and normal portal triads. Microsphere deposition in nontumorous parenchyma can result in radiation-induced liver injury, with lethal RE-induced liver disease (REILD) at the outer end of the spectrum. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate RE-related hepatotoxicity and present an overview of the currently applied definitions and clinically relevant characteristics of REILD. A systematic literature search on REILD was performed. Studies after the introduction of the term REILD (2008) were screened for definitions of REILD. Hepatotoxicity and applied definitions of REILD were compared. Liver biochemistry test abnormalities occur in up to 100% of patients after RE, mostly self-limiting. The incidence of symptomatic REILD varied between 0 and 31%, although in most reports, the incidence was 0-8%, with a lethal outcome in 0-5%. With the exception of bilirubin, the presentation of hepatotoxicity and REILD was similar for cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients. No uniform definition of REILD was established in the current literature. Here, we propose a unifying definition and grading system for REILD. RE-related hepatotoxicity is a common phenomenon; symptomatic REILD, however, is rare. Currently, reporting of REILD is highly variable, precluding reliable comparison between studies, identification of risk factors, and treatment developments.
Collapse
|
45
|
Ahmed O, Patel MV, Masrani A, Chong B, Osman M, Tasse J, Soni J, Turba UC, Arslan B. Assessing Intra-arterial Complications of Planning and Treatment Angiograms for Y-90 Radioembolization. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2017; 40:704-711. [PMID: 28078375 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-016-1555-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2016] [Accepted: 12/22/2016] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report hepatic arterial-related complications encountered during planning and treatment angiograms for radioembolization and understand any potential-associated risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS 518 mapping or treatment angiograms for 180 patients with primary or metastatic disease to the liver treated by Yttrium-90 radioembolization between 2/2010 and 12/2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Intra-procedural complications were recorded per SIR guidelines. Patient demographics, indication for treatment, prior exposure to chemotherapeutic agents, operator experience, and disease burden were reviewed. Technical variables including type of radioembolic (glass vs. resin microspheres), indication for angiography (mapping vs. treatment), variant anatomy, and attempts at coil embolization were also assessed. RESULTS Thirteen (13/518, 2.5%) arterial-related complications occurred in 13 patients. All but two complications resulted during transcatheter coil embolization to prevent non-target embolization. Complications included coil migration (n = 6), arterial dissection (n = 2), focal vessel perforation (n = 2), arterial thrombus (n = 2), and vasospasm prohibiting further arterial sub-selection (n = 1). Transarterial coiling was identified as a significant risk factor of complications on both univariate and multivariate regression analysis (odds ratio 7.8, P = 0.004). Usage of resin microspheres was also a significant risk factor (odds ratio 9.5, P = 0.042). No other technical parameters or pre-procedural variables were significant after adjusting for confounding on multivariate analysis (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION Intra-procedural hepatic arterial complications encountered during radioembolization were infrequent but occurred mainly during coil embolization to prevent non-target delivery to extra-hepatic arteries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Osman Ahmed
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
| | - Mikin V Patel
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA
| | - Abdulrahman Masrani
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA
| | - Bradford Chong
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA
| | - Mohammed Osman
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA
| | - Jordan Tasse
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA
| | - Jayesh Soni
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA
| | - Ulku Cenk Turba
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA
| | - Bulent Arslan
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W. Harrison Street, Suite 450, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Padia SA, Lewandowski RJ, Johnson GE, Sze DY, Ward TJ, Gaba RC, Baerlocher MO, Gates VL, Riaz A, Brown DB, Siddiqi NH, Walker TG, Silberzweig JE, Mitchell JW, Nikolic B, Salem R. Radioembolization of Hepatic Malignancies: Background, Quality Improvement Guidelines, and Future Directions. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2017; 28:1-15. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.09.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2016] [Revised: 09/18/2016] [Accepted: 09/20/2016] [Indexed: 02/09/2023] Open
|
47
|
Koran ME, Stewart S, Baker JC, Lipnik AJ, Banovac F, Omary RA, Brown DB. Five percent dextrose maximizes dose delivery of Yttrium-90 resin microspheres and reduces rates of premature stasis compared to sterile water. Biomed Rep 2016; 5:745-748. [PMID: 28105342 DOI: 10.3892/br.2016.799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2016] [Accepted: 10/26/2016] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Resin Yttrium-90 (Y90) microspheres have historically been infused using sterile water (H2O). In 2013, recommendations expanded to allow delivery with 5% dextrose in water (D5W). In this retrospective study, we hypothesized that D5W would improve Y90 delivery with a lower incidence of stasis. We reviewed 190 resin Y90 infusions using H2O (n=137) or D5W (n=53). Y90 dosimetry was calculated using the body surface area method. Infusion was halted if intra-arterial stasis was fluoroscopically identified prior to clearing the vial. Differences between H2O and D5W groups were calculated for activity prescription, percentage of cases reaching stasis, and percentage delivery of prescribed activity using z- and t-test comparisons, with α=0.05. Thirty-one of 137 H2O infusions developed stasis compared to 2 of 53 with D5W (z=3.07, p=1.05E-03). D5W also had a significantly higher prescribed activity than H2O [28.2 millicuries (mCi) vs. 20.4 mCi, respectively; t=5.0, p=1.1E-6]. D5W had a higher delivery percentage of the prescribed dose compared to H2O (101.5 vs. 92.7%, respectively; t=3.8, p=1.92E-4). In conclusion, resin microsphere infusion utilizing D5W has a significantly lower rate of stasis than H2O and results in more complete dose delivery. D5W is preferable to H2O for resin microsphere infusion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary Ellen Koran
- Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Samantha Stewart
- Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Jennifer C Baker
- Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Andrew J Lipnik
- Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Fil Banovac
- Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Reed A Omary
- Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Daniel B Brown
- Department of Radiology and Radiologic Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Mehta R, Cai K, Kumar N, Knuttinen MG, Anderson TM, Lu H, Lu Y. A Lesion-Based Response Prediction Model Using Pretherapy PET/CT Image Features for Y90 Radioembolization to Hepatic Malignancies. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2016; 16:620-629. [PMID: 27601017 DOI: 10.1177/1533034616666721] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
We present a probabilistic approach to identify patients with primary and secondary hepatic malignancies as responders or nonresponders to yttrium-90 radioembolization therapy. Recent advances in computer-aided detection have decreased false-negative and false-positive rates of perceived abnormalities; however, there is limited research in using similar concepts to predict treatment response. Our approach is driven by the goal of precision medicine to determine pretherapy fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography imaging parameters to facilitate the identification of patients who would benefit most from yttrium-90 radioembolization therapy, while avoiding complex and costly procedures for those who would not. Our algorithm seeks to predict a patient's response by discovering common co-occurring image patterns in the lesions of baseline fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography scans by extracting invariant shape and texture features. The extracted imaging features were represented as a distribution of each subject based on the bag-of-feature paradigm. The distribution was applied in a multinomial naive Bayes classifier to predict whether a patient would be a responder or nonresponder to yttrium-90 radioembolization therapy based on the imaging features of a pretherapy fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography scan. Comprehensive published criteria were used to determine lesion-based clinical treatment response based on fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography imaging findings. Our results show that the model is able to predict a patient with liver cancer as a responder or nonresponder to yttrium-90 radioembolization therapy with a sensitivity of 0.791 using extracted invariant imaging features from the pretherapy fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography test. The sensitivity increased to 0.821 when combining extracted invariant image features with variable features of tumor volume.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rahul Mehta
- 1 Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA.,2 Department of Bioengineering, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Kejia Cai
- 1 Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA.,2 Department of Bioengineering, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA.,3 The Center for MR Research, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Nishant Kumar
- 1 Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - M Grace Knuttinen
- 1 Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Thomas M Anderson
- 1 Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Hui Lu
- 2 Department of Bioengineering, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Yang Lu
- 1 Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Srinivas SM, Nasr EC, Kunam VK, Bullen JA, Purysko AS. Administered activity and outcomes of glass versus resin (90)Y microsphere radioembolization in patients with colorectal liver metastases. J Gastrointest Oncol 2016; 7:530-9. [PMID: 27563442 DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2016.03.09] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Given the differences in size, specific activity, and dosing methods for glass yttrium-90 microspheres ((90)Y-glass) and resin (90)Y microspheres ((90)Y-resin), these therapies may expose the liver to different amounts of radiation, thereby affecting their efficacy and tolerability. We aimed to compare the prescribed activity of (90)Y-glass and (90)Y-resin for real-world patients undergoing selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) for liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and to assess efficacy and safety outcomes in these patients. METHODS We examined the records of 28 consecutive patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases treated with SIRT between June 2008 and May 2011 at our institution. Using baseline CT and MR images, we calculated a projected activity as if we had used the other product and compared it to the actual prescribed activity of (90)Y-glass and (90)Y-resin for each SIRT treatment per manufacturer guidelines. Progression and adverse events were evaluated at follow up visits. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS For (90)Y-glass treatments with a mean prescribed (90)Y activity of 1.77 GBq, the mean projected (90)Y-resin activity was 0.84 GBq. For (90)Y-resin treatments with a mean prescribed (90)Y activity of 1.05 GBq, the mean projected (90)Y-glass activity was 2.48 GBq. The median survival was 9.3 months versus 18.2 months for (90)Y-glass and (90)Y-resin, respectively (P=0.292). During the second year after SIRT, the hazard ratio of death for patients treated with (90)Y-glass versus (90)Y-resin was 4.0 (95% CI: 1.3, 12.3; P=0.017). No significant difference in progression, adverse events or liver toxicity was observed. CONCLUSIONS Using manufacturer recommended guidelines, (90)Y-resin delivers significantly less activity than (90)Y-glass to patients with liver-dominant mCRC undergoing SIRT with no significant difference in adverse events and a trend toward improved survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shyam M Srinivas
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Elie C Nasr
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Vamsi K Kunam
- Department of Radiology, SUNY Downstate University Hospital, Brooklyn, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer A Bullen
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Andrei S Purysko
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; ; Section of Abdominal Imaging, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Standardized Added Metabolic Activity Predicts Survival After Intra-arterial Resin-Based 90Y Radioembolization Therapy in Unresectable Chemorefractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer to the Liver. Clin Nucl Med 2016; 41:e76-81. [PMID: 26447380 DOI: 10.1097/rlu.0000000000000991] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Standardized added metabolic (SAM) activity is a functional objective measurement of the total tumoral metabolic activity that avoids partial volume effect and thresholding, which limit conventional PET parameters. The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of SAM in predicting survival in unresectable, chemorefractory colorectal hepatic metastatic disease treated with resin-based Y radioembolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS This is a prospective correlative study of patients with unresectable, chemorefractory colorectal liver metastasis who underwent F-FDG PET/CT and CT/MRI before and after Y. Target RECIST, PERCIST, change in total glycolytic activity (ΔTGA), and ΔSAM treatment response were assessed. Percentage changes in diameter, SUVpeak, TGA, and SAM were calculated pre- and post-Y therapy and objective response was defined as >30% change (responders). Survival analysis by Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and Cox proportional hazard models were performed and significance was set at <0.05. RESULTS Sixteen patients (mean age of 61.6) were enrolled and performed a total of 20 Y therapies. After Y, target ΔSAM showed an objective response rate of 40% vs. 35%, 30%, and 22.2% based on target ΔTGA, PERCIST, and RECIST criteria, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) of the cohort after Y was 9.2 months (CI 95% 2.2-16.2). Patients demonstrating objective response based on ΔSAM had a median OS of 22.7 months (CI 95% 12.4-33.0) vs. 6.7 (CI 95% 4.2-9.2) in non-responders (P = 0.007). On multivariate analysis, hazard ratios for the objective response group based on target ΔSAM were 0.01 (P = 0.03) vs. 0.05 (P = 0.08), 0.20 (P = 0.29), and 0.91 (P = 0.98) based on target ΔTGA, PERCIST, and RECIST criteria, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In unresectable colorectal liver metastatic disease refractory to standard chemotherapy, ΔSAM predicted OS for assessment of response following Y radioembolization therapy, whereas RECIST, PERCIST, and ΔTGA did not.
Collapse
|