1
|
Jones AK. Known Unknowns: Gaps in Dose Distribution in Radioembolization, and in Our Understanding of Them. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024; 35:1613-1615. [PMID: 39053847 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2024.07.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2024] [Revised: 07/14/2024] [Accepted: 07/16/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- A Kyle Jones
- Departments of Imaging Physics and Interventional Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sandow T, Gimenez J, Nunez K, Tramel R, Gilbert P, Oliver B, Cline M, Fowers K, Cohen A, Thevenot P. Using Voxel-Based Dosimetry to Evaluate Sphere Concentration and Tumor Dose in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Yttrium-90 Radiation Segmentectomy with Glass Microspheres. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024; 35:1602-1612.e1. [PMID: 39047936 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2024.05.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Revised: 05/13/2024] [Accepted: 05/19/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To utilize voxel-based dosimetry following radiation segmentectomy (RS) to understand microsphere distribution and validate current literature regarding radiologic and pathologic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective, single-center analysis of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (N = 56) treated with yttrium-90 (90Y) RS with glass microspheres (Therasphere; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) from 2020 to 2022 was performed. Posttreatment voxel-based dosimetry was evaluated using Mirada DBx Build 1.2.0 Simplicit90Y software (Boston Scientific) and utilized to calculate sphere concentration to tumor as well as D70 (minimum dose to 70% total tumor volume), D90, and D99. Time to progression (TTP), treatment response, and adverse events were studied. RESULTS Fifty-six solitary tumors were analyzed with a median tumor diameter of 3.4 cm (range, 1.2-6.8 cm) and median tumor absorbed dose of 732 Gy (range, 252-1,776 Gy). Median sphere activity (SA) at the time of delivery was 1,446 Bq (range, 417-2,621 Bq). Median tumor sphere concentration was 12,868 spheres/mL (range, 2,655-37,183 spheres/mL). Sphere concentration into tumor and normal tissue was inversely correlated with perfused treatment volume (R2 = 0.21 and R2 = 0.39, respectively). Of the 51 tumors with posttreatment imaging, objective response was noted in 49 patients (96%) and complete response in 42 patients (82%). The median TTP was not reached with a 2-year progression rate of 11%. Fifteen patients underwent liver transplant. Median tumor necrosis was 99% (range, 80%-100%). Lower tumor volumes and higher D99 were associated with complete pathologic necrosis (P < .001 and P = .022, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Voxel-based dosimetry following 90Y radioembolization can be utilized to account for sphere deposition and distribution into tumor. Ablative RS with high SA yields durable radiologic and pathologic outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tyler Sandow
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana.
| | - Juan Gimenez
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Kelley Nunez
- Institute of Translational Research, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Richard Tramel
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Patrick Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Brianna Oliver
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Michael Cline
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Kirk Fowers
- Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, Massachusetts
| | - Ari Cohen
- Multi-Organ Transplant Institute, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Paul Thevenot
- Institute of Translational Research, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Harmath C, Fung A, Aslam A, Kamath A, Lall C, Surabhi V, Borhani AA, Mendiratta-Lala M, Do R. LI-RADS radiation-based treatment response algorithm for HCC: what to know and how to use it. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2024:10.1007/s00261-024-04611-2. [PMID: 39424663 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04611-2] [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: 08/02/2024] [Revised: 09/18/2024] [Accepted: 09/24/2024] [Indexed: 10/21/2024]
Abstract
Locoregional treatments (LRT) continue to advance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) or transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with radioactive 90 Yttrium (Y90) microspheres is currently widely accepted, and external beam and stereotactic body radiation (EBRT/SBRT) are increasingly used as LRT1-5. Assessment of treatment response after these radiation-based therapies can be challenging, given that the adjacent liver also undergoes treatment related changes, inflammatory changes occur, and there is a variable time for response to develop. In 2017, the liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) workgroup initially developed a single algorithm for the imaging assessment of treatment response encompassing all types of locoregional therapies, the LI-RADS treatment response (LR-TR) algorithm. Recognizing that response and imaging patterns differ between radiation and non-radiation based therapies, the LR-TR working group recently updated the algorithm to reflect the unique characteristics of tumor response for therapies involving radiation. This article aims to elucidate the changes in the new version of the LI-RADS TR, with a guide for algorithm utilization and illustration of expected and unexpected findings post liver directed therapies for HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alice Fung
- Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Richard Do
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sandow T, Gimenez J, Fowers K, Thevenot P. The Sphere Conundrum: Author's Reply to Commentary on Voxel-Based Dosimetry with Glass Microspheres. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024:S1051-0443(24)00560-8. [PMID: 39260795 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2024.08.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2024] [Accepted: 08/29/2024] [Indexed: 09/13/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Tyler Sandow
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, 1514 Jefferson Hwy., New Orleans, LA 70121.
| | - Juan Gimenez
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health, 1514 Jefferson Hwy., New Orleans, LA 70121
| | - Kirk Fowers
- Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, MA
| | - Paul Thevenot
- Institute of Translational Research, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, LA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jones AK. The Sphere Conundrum: Response to Author's Reply to Commentary on Voxel-Based Dosimetry with Glass Microspheres. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024:S1051-0443(24)00561-X. [PMID: 39260794 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2024.08.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2024] [Accepted: 08/29/2024] [Indexed: 09/13/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- A Kyle Jones
- Departments of Imaging Physics and Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler, Unit 1472, Houston, TX 77030.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Demir B, Soydal C, Kucuk NO, Celebioglu EC, Bilgic MS, Kuru Oz D, Elhan AH, Kir KM. Voxel-based dosimetry with integrated Y-90 PET/MRI and prediction of response of primary and metastatic liver tumors to radioembolization with Y-90 glass microspheres. Ann Nucl Med 2024:10.1007/s12149-024-01974-w. [PMID: 39207630 DOI: 10.1007/s12149-024-01974-w] [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: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 08/22/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE In this study, we aimed to evaluate the response of the primary and metastatic liver tumors to radioembolization with 90Y glass microspheres and investigate its correlations with dosimetric variables calculated with 90Y PET/MRI. METHODS In this ambispective study, 44 patients treated with 90Y glass microspheres and imaged with 90Y PET/MRI were included for analysis. Dosimetric analysis was performed for every perfused lesion using dose-volume histograms. Response was assessed by comparing pre-treatment and follow-up total lesion glycolysis (TLG) values derived from 18F-FDG PET imaging. The relationship between ΔTLG and log-transformed dosimetric variables was analyzed with linear mixed effects regression models. ROC analyses were performed to compare discriminatory power of the variables in predicting response and complete response. RESULTS Regression and ROC analyses demonstrated that mean tumor dose and almost all D values were statistically significant predictors of treatment response and complete treatment response. Specifically, D60, D70 and D80 values exhibited significantly higher discriminatory power for predicting treatment response compared to the mean dose (Dmean) delivered to tumor. High specificity cut-off values to predict response were determined as 160.75 Gy for Dmean, 95.50 Gy for D60, 89 Gy for D70, and 59.50 Gy for D80. Similarly, high-specificity cut-off values to predict complete response were 262.75 Gy for Dmean, 173 Gy for D70, 140.5 Gy for D80, and 100 Gy for D90. CONCLUSION In this study, we demonstrated that voxel-based dosimetry with post-treatment 90Y PET/MRI can predict response to treatment. D60, D70 and D80 variables also did have greater discriminatory power compared to Dmean in prediction of response. In addition, we present high-specificity cut-offs to predict response (CR + PR) and complete response (CR) for both Dmean and several D variables derived from dose-volume histograms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Burak Demir
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey.
| | - Cigdem Soydal
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Nuriye Ozlem Kucuk
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey
| | | | | | - Digdem Kuru Oz
- Department of Radiology, Ankara University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Atilla Halil Elhan
- Department of Biostatistics, Ankara University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Kemal Metin Kir
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Huesa-Berral C, Withrow JD, Dawson RJ, Beekman C, Bolch WE, Paganetti H, Wehrenberg-Klee E, Bertolet A. MIDOS: a novel stochastic model towards a treatment planning system for microsphere dosimetry in liver tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2024; 51:1506-1515. [PMID: 38155237 PMCID: PMC11043005 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-023-06567-9] [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: 08/24/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/30/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) procedures treat liver tumors by injecting radioactive microspheres into the hepatic artery. Currently, there is a critical need to optimize TARE towards a personalized dosimetry approach. To this aim, we present a novel microsphere dosimetry (MIDOS) stochastic model to estimate the activity delivered to the tumor(s), normal liver, and lung. METHODS MIDOS incorporates adult male/female liver computational phantoms with the hepatic arterial, hepatic portal venous, and hepatic venous vascular trees. Tumors can be placed in both models at user discretion. The perfusion of microspheres follows cluster patterns, and a Markov chain approach was applied to microsphere navigation, with the terminal location of microspheres determined to be in either normal hepatic parenchyma, hepatic tumor, or lung. A tumor uptake model was implemented to determine if microspheres get lodged in the tumor, and a probability was included in determining the shunt of microspheres to the lung. A sensitivity analysis of the model parameters was performed, and radiation segmentectomy/lobectomy procedures were simulated over a wide range of activity perfused. Then, the impact of using different microspheres, i.e., SIR-Sphere®, TheraSphere®, and QuiremSphere®, on the tumor-to-normal ratio (TNR), lung shunt fraction (LSF), and mean absorbed dose was analyzed. RESULTS Highly vascularized tumors translated into increased TNR. Treatment results (TNR and LSF) were significantly more variable for microspheres with high particle load. In our scenarios with 1.5 GBq perfusion, TNR was maximum for TheraSphere® at calibration time in segmentectomy/lobar technique, for SIR-Sphere® at 1-3 days post-calibration, and regarding QuiremSphere® at 3 days post-calibration. CONCLUSION This novel approach is a decisive step towards developing a personalized dosimetry framework for TARE. MIDOS assists in making clinical decisions in TARE treatment planning by assessing various delivery parameters and simulating different tumor uptakes. MIDOS offers evaluation of treatment outcomes, such as TNR and LSF, and quantitative scenario-specific decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlos Huesa-Berral
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Julia D Withrow
- J. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Robert J Dawson
- J. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Chris Beekman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Wesley E Bolch
- J. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Eric Wehrenberg-Klee
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alejandro Bertolet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sarwar A, Malik MS, Vo NH, Tsai LL, Tahir MM, Curry MP, Catana AM, Bullock AJ, Parker JA, Eckhoff DE, Nasser IA, Weinstein JL, Ahmed M. Efficacy and Safety of Radiation Segmentectomy with 90Y Resin Microspheres for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Radiology 2024; 311:e231386. [PMID: 38713023 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.231386] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/08/2024]
Abstract
Background Limited data are available on radiation segmentectomy (RS) for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using yttrium 90 (90Y) resin microsphere doses determined by using a single-compartment medical internal radiation dosimetry (MIRD) model. Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of RS treatment of HCC with 90Y resin microspheres using a single-compartment MIRD model and correlate posttreatment dose with outcomes. Materials and Methods This retrospective single-center study included adult patients with HCC who underwent RS with 90Y resin microspheres between July 2014 and December 2022. Posttreatment PET/CT and dosimetry were performed. Adverse events were assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0. Per-lesion and overall response rates (ie, complete response [CR], objective response, disease control, and duration of response) were assessed at imaging using the Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results Among 67 patients (median age, 69 years [IQR, 63-78 years]; 54 male patients) with HCC, median tumor absorbed dose was 232 Gy (IQR, 163-405 Gy). At 3 months, per-lesion and overall (per-patient) CR was achieved in 47 (70%) and 41 (61%) of 67 patients, respectively. At 6 months (n = 46), per-lesion rates of objective response and disease control were both 94%, and per-patient rates were both 78%. A total of 88% (95% CI: 79 99) and 72% (95% CI: 58, 90) of patients had a per-lesion and overall duration of response of 1 year or greater. At 1 month, a grade 3 clinical adverse event (abdominal pain) occurred in one of 67 (1.5%) patients. Median posttreatment OS was 26 months (95% CI: 20, not reached). Disease progression at 2 years was lower in the group that received 300 Gy or more than in the group that received less than 300 Gy (17% vs 61%; P = .047), with no local progression in the former group through the end of follow-up. Conclusion Among patients with HCC who underwent RS with 90Y resin microspheres, 88% and 72% achieved a per-lesion and overall duration of response of 1 year or greater, respectively, with one grade 3 adverse event. In patients whose tumors received 300 Gy or more according to posttreatment dosimetry, a disease progression benefit was noted. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ammar Sarwar
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - M Saad Malik
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Nhi H Vo
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Leo L Tsai
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Muhammad M Tahir
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Michael P Curry
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Andreea M Catana
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Andrea J Bullock
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - John A Parker
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Devin E Eckhoff
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Imad A Nasser
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Jeffrey L Weinstein
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| | - Muneeb Ahmed
- From the Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology (A.S., M.S.M., N.H.V., M.M.T., J.L.W., M.A.); Department of Radiology (L.L.T.); Division of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine (M.P.C., A.M.C.); Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology (A.J.B.); Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology (J.A.P.); Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery (D.E.E.); and Department of Pathology (I.A.N.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Yu Q, Neale M, Ungchusri E, Rothenberger NJ, Liao C, Patel M, Pillai A, Navuluri R, Ahmed O, Ha TV. Tumor Size and Watershed Area Correlate with Incomplete Treatment and Tumor Progression after Selective Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024:S1051-0443(24)00125-8. [PMID: 38336031 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2024.01.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2023] [Revised: 01/26/2024] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify factors of incomplete treatment after segmental transarterial radioembolization (TARE) for treatment-naive and solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 75 consecutive patients (age, 68.5 years [SD ± 8.0]; 25/75 [33.3%] women) with treatment-naive, solitary HCC underwent segmental or subsegmental TARE with glass microspheres (tumor size, 3.8 cm [SD ± 2.2]; administered dose, 222.6 Gy [SD ± 123.9]) at a single institution from November 2015 to June 2022. Radiologic response and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed as per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. RESULTS Complete treatment was achieved in 48 of 75 (64.0%) patients (mean follow-up, 33.2 months [SD ± 27.4]). Patients with incomplete treatment (27/75, 36%) presented with larger tumor size (5.0 [SD ± 2.5] vs 3.1 [SD ± 1.6] cm; P = .0001), with more tumors located in the watershed zone (81.5% vs 41.7%; P = .001). These patients were less likely to be bridged to transplant or resection (22.2% vs 52.1%; P = .015). Watershed tumors demonstrated worse target tumor PFS (median PFS, 19 months vs not reached; P = .0104) and overall PFS (9.1 months vs not reached; P = .0077). Watershed location was associated with worse PFS among tumors >3 cm in size (8.4 months vs not reached; P = .035) but not in tumors ≤3 cm in size (52.2 months vs not reached; P = .915). CONCLUSIONS Tumor size and watershed location were associated with incomplete treatment after segmental TARE for HCC. Watershed tumors were associated with worse PFS, particularly tumors larger than 3 cm. These tumors may require careful treatment planning and repeated treatments to ensure a durable response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qian Yu
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
| | - Monika Neale
- Department of Radiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Ethan Ungchusri
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | | | - Chuanhong Liao
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Mikin Patel
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Anjana Pillai
- Department of Hepatology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Rakesh Navuluri
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Osman Ahmed
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Thuong Van Ha
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Mourad SN, De la Garza-Ramos C, Toskich BB. Radiation Segmentectomy for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Practical Review of Evidence. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:669. [PMID: 38339418 PMCID: PMC10854641 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16030669] [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: 01/18/2024] [Revised: 02/02/2024] [Accepted: 02/03/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Radiation segmentectomy is a versatile, safe, and effective ablative therapy for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Advances in radiation segmentectomy patient selection, procedural technique, and dosimetry have positioned this modality as a curative-intent and guideline-supported treatment for patients with solitary HCC. This review describes key radiation segmentectomy concepts and summarizes the existing literary knowledgebase.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia N. Mourad
- College of Medicine, Florida State University, Orlando, FL 32301, USA
| | | | - Beau B. Toskich
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Villalobos A, Pisanie JLD, Gandhi RT, Kokabi N. Yttrium-90 Radioembolization Dosimetry: Dose Considerations, Optimization, and Tips. Semin Intervent Radiol 2024; 41:63-78. [PMID: 38495257 PMCID: PMC10940044 DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1779715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/19/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Villalobos
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Johannes L. du Pisanie
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Ripal T. Gandhi
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Nima Kokabi
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Doyle PW, Workman CS, Grice JV, McGonigle TW, Huang S, Borgmann AJ, Baker JC, Duncan DP, Taylor JE, Brown DB. Predictive Dosimetry and Outcomes of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated by Yttrium-90 Resin Microsphere Radioembolization: A Retrospective Analysis Using Technetium-99m Macroaggregated Albumin Single Photon Emission CT/CT and Planning Software. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024:S1051-0443(24)00026-5. [PMID: 38246416 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2023.11.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2023] [Revised: 11/11/2023] [Accepted: 11/22/2023] [Indexed: 01/23/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To characterize estimated mean absorbed tumor dose (ADT), objective response (OR), and estimated target dose of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after resin microsphere yttrium-90 (90Y) radioembolization using partition dosimetry. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this retrospective, single-center study, multicompartment dosimetry of index tumors receiving 90Y radioembolization between October 2015 and June 2022 was performed using a commercial software package and pretreatment technetium-99m macroaggregated albumin single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/computed tomography (CT). In total, 101 patients with HCC underwent 102 treatments of 127 index tumors. Patients underwent imaging every 2-3 months after treatment to determine best response per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST). Best response was defined as the greatest response category per mRECIST and categorized as OR or nonresponse (NR). A Cox proportional hazards model evaluated the probability of tumor OR and progression-free survival using ADT. RESULTS The median follow-up period was 148 days (interquartile range [IQR], 92-273 days). The median ADT of OR was 141.9 Gy (IQR, 89.4-215.8 Gy) compared with the median ADT of NR treatments of 70.8 Gy (IQR, 42.0-135.3 Gy; P < .001). Only ADT was predictive of response (hazard ratio = 2.79 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.44-5.40]; P = .003). At 6 months, an ADT of 157 Gy predicted 90.0% (95% CI: 41.3%-98.3%) probability of OR. At 1 year, an ADT of 157 Gy predicted 91.6% (95% CI: 78.3%-100%) probability of progression-free survival. Partition modeling and delivered activity were predictive of progression (P = .021 and P = .003, respectively). CONCLUSIONS For HCC treated with resin microspheres, tumors receiving higher ADT exhibited higher rates of OR. An ADT of 157 Gy predicted 90.0% OR at 6 months.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick W Doyle
- Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - C Spencer Workman
- Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Jared V Grice
- Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Trey W McGonigle
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Shi Huang
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Anthony J Borgmann
- Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Jennifer C Baker
- Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - David P Duncan
- Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Jason E Taylor
- Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Daniel B Brown
- Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Sag AA, Agritelley E, Ronald J, Young SJ, Kim CY. Vortex-assisted resin y90 delivery via 175 cm Truselect microcatheter: case factors for high residual despite double-flush protocol. Nucl Med Commun 2024; 45:61-67. [PMID: 37901924 DOI: 10.1097/mnm.0000000000001784] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report efficiency of resin y90 delivery using SIROS via 175 cm TruSelect microcatheter with double-flush protocol (40 ml dextrose total). METHODS IRB-approved retrospective review of all patients undergoing SIROS injection of y90 Sir-Spheres via TruSelect from 2019 through 2022 at one quaternary-care academic institution, including medical records. RESULTS Included were 48 infusions in 25 patients across 11 cancer histologies. Mean planned, delivered, and residual activities were 28 ± 17, 27 ± 17, 1.1 ± 0.56 mCi respectively (mean residual 4.9% ± 2.8%) across flex-dosing precalibrations including 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day SIROS (4/51, 16/51, and 28/51). Mean liver treatment volume was 483 ± 306 ml with target dose mean of 128 ± 26 Gy in non-segmentectomy cases; Radiation segmentectomy was performed in 15/48 (31%). Arterial stasis was documented in 9/48 (19%) of cases. Use of a 3-day precalibrated SIROS dose, use of activity <10 mCi, treatment of smaller liver volumes (<200 ml) and documentation of stasis were associated with higher residual activity ( P = 0.025, P = 0.0007, P = 0.0177, and P = 0.049, respectively) were associated with higher residuals. CONCLUSION Combining the new technologies of SIROS and the Truselect microcatheter with a double-flush protocol yielded <10% residual in 94% of y90 infusions. Future studies may clarify if the predictors of high residual dose seen here may warrant microcatheter-specific considerations for dosimetry or dose preparation at the Radiopharmacy level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Alper Sag
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center,
| | | | - James Ronald
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center,
| | - Shamar J Young
- Department of Medical Imaging, Division of Interventional Radiology, University of Arizona Medical Center, Tucson, Arizona, USA
| | - Charles Y Kim
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center,
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Malone CD, Sandow T. Durable Outcomes Missing for Radiation Segmentectomy with Resin Microspheres. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2023; 34:1844-1846. [PMID: 37315682 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2023.04.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2023] [Accepted: 04/20/2023] [Indexed: 06/16/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher D Malone
- Interventional Radiology Section, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 South Kingshighway Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63110.
| | - Tyler Sandow
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Health System, New Orleans, LA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Villalobos A, Kokabi N. Authors' Reply: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes for Resin-Based Yttrium-90 Radiation Segmentectomy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Should Be Further Investigated. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2023; 34:1846-1847. [PMID: 37315683 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2023.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2023] [Accepted: 06/07/2023] [Indexed: 06/16/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Villalobos
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, 1364 Clifton Rd. NE, Suite #D112, Atlanta, GA 30322.
| | - Nima Kokabi
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, 1364 Clifton Rd. NE, Suite #D112, Atlanta, GA 30322
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Aliseda D, Rotellar F, Sancho L, Batidas JF, Martínez de la Cuesta A, Rodríguez-Fraile M. Surgery and radioembolization of liver tumors. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2023:S2253-8089(23)00056-3. [PMID: 37321348 DOI: 10.1016/j.remnie.2023.06.002] [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: 05/31/2023] [Accepted: 06/08/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
Surgical resection is considered the curative treatment par excellence for patients with primary or metastatic liver tumors. However, less than 40% of them are candidates for surgery, either due to non-modifiable factors (comorbidities, age, liver dysfunction…), or to the invasion or proximity of the tumor to the main vascular requirements, the lack of a future liver remnant (FLR) adequate to maintain postoperative liver function, or criteria of tumor size and number. In these last factors, hepatic radioembolization has been shown to play a role as a presurgical tool, either by hypertrophy of the FLR or by reducing tumor size that manages to reduce tumor staging (term known as "downstaging"). To these is added a third factor, which is its ability to apply the test of time, which makes it possible to identify those patients who present progression of the disease in a short period of time (both locally and at distance), avoiding a unnecessary surgery. This paper aims to review RE as a tool to facilitate liver surgery, both through the experience of our center and the available scientific evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Aliseda
- Departamento de Cirugía General, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
| | - Fernando Rotellar
- Departamento de Cirugía General, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
| | - Lidia Sancho
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Madrid, Spain
| | - Juan Fernando Batidas
- Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
| | | | | |
Collapse
|