UNLABELLED: One approach to treatment of primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is intraarterial injection of (131)I-lipiodol. Although clinical results have been positive, the therapy can be improved by using (188)Re instead of (131)I as the radionuclide. (188)Re is a high-energy beta-emitter, has a shorter half-life than (131)I, and has only low-intensity gamma-rays in its decay. The present study compared the cytotoxic effect of the radionuclide therapy in HCC patients treated with (131)I-lipiodol and (188)Re-4-hexadecyl 2,2,9,9-tetramethyl-4,7-diaza-1,10-decanethiol (HDD)/lipiodol. To this end, dicentric chromosomes (DCs) were scored in metaphase spreads of peripheral blood cultures. The equivalent total-body dose was deduced from the DC yields using an in vitro dose-response curve. METHODS: Twenty (131)I-lipiodol treatments and 11 (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol treatments were performed on, respectively, 16 and 7 patients with inoperable HCC. Patients received a mean activity of 1.89 GBq of (131)I-lipiodol or 3.56 GBq of (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol into the liver artery by catheterization. For each patient, a blood sample was taken during the week before therapy. A blood sample was also taken 7 and 14 d after administration for the patients treated with (131)I-lipiodol and 1 or 2 d after administration for the patients treated with (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol. RESULTS: The mean DC yield of (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol therapy (0.087 DCs per cell) was significantly lower than that of (131)I-lipiodol therapy (0.144 DCs per cell) for the administered activities. Corresponding equivalent total-body doses were 1.04 Gy for (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol and 1.46 Gy for (131)I-lipiodol. Data analysis showed that, in comparison with (131)I-lipidol, (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol yielded a smaller cytotoxic effect and a lower radiation exposure for an expected higher tumor-killing effect. CONCLUSION: (188)Re is a valuable alternative for (131)I in the treatment of HCC with radiolabeled lipiodol, and a dose escalation study for (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol therapy is warranted.
UNLABELLED: One approach to treatment of primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is intraarterial injection of (131)I-lipiodol. Although clinical results have been positive, the therapy can be improved by using (188)Re instead of (131)I as the radionuclide. (188)Re is a high-energy beta-emitter, has a shorter half-life than (131)I, and has only low-intensity gamma-rays in its decay. The present study compared the cytotoxic effect of the radionuclide therapy in HCC patients treated with (131)I-lipiodol and (188)Re-4-hexadecyl 2,2,9,9-tetramethyl-4,7-diaza-1,10-decanethiol (HDD)/lipiodol. To this end, dicentric chromosomes (DCs) were scored in metaphase spreads of peripheral blood cultures. The equivalent total-body dose was deduced from the DC yields using an in vitro dose-response curve. METHODS: Twenty (131)I-lipiodol treatments and 11 (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol treatments were performed on, respectively, 16 and 7 patients with inoperable HCC. Patients received a mean activity of 1.89 GBq of (131)I-lipiodol or 3.56 GBq of (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol into the liver artery by catheterization. For each patient, a blood sample was taken during the week before therapy. A blood sample was also taken 7 and 14 d after administration for the patients treated with (131)I-lipiodol and 1 or 2 d after administration for the patients treated with (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol. RESULTS: The mean DC yield of (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol therapy (0.087 DCs per cell) was significantly lower than that of (131)I-lipiodol therapy (0.144 DCs per cell) for the administered activities. Corresponding equivalent total-body doses were 1.04 Gy for (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol and 1.46 Gy for (131)I-lipiodol. Data analysis showed that, in comparison with (131)I-lipidol, (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol yielded a smaller cytotoxic effect and a lower radiation exposure for an expected higher tumor-killing effect. CONCLUSION: (188)Re is a valuable alternative for (131)I in the treatment of HCC with radiolabeled lipiodol, and a dose escalation study for (188)Re-HDD/lipiodol therapy is warranted.
Authors: A Giussani; M A Lopez; H Romm; A Testa; E A Ainsbury; M Degteva; S Della Monaca; G Etherington; P Fattibene; I Güclu; A Jaworska; D C Lloyd; I Malátová; S McComish; D Melo; J Osko; A Rojo; S Roch-Lefevre; L Roy; E Shishkina; N Sotnik; S Y Tolmachev; A Wieser; C Woda; M Youngman Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Date: 2020-05-05 Impact factor: 1.925