PURPOSE: To validate our initial pilot study and confirm sustained safety and tumor response of extended-shelf-life (90)Y glass microspheres. We hypothesized that for the same planned tissue dose, the increase in number of glass microspheres (decayed to the second week of their allowable shelf-life) administered for the same absorbed dose would result in better tumor distribution of the microspheres without causing additional adverse events. METHODS: Between June 2007 and January 2010, 134 patients underwent radioembolization with extended-shelf-life (90)Y glass microspheres; data from 84 new patients were combined with data from our 50-patient pilot study cohort. Baseline and follow-up imaging and laboratory data were obtained 1 and 3 months after therapy and every 3 months thereafter. Clinical and biochemical toxicities were prospectively captured and categorized according to the Common Terminology Criteria. Response in the index lesion was assessed using WHO and EASL guidelines. RESULTS: The mean delivered radiation dose was 123 Gy to the target liver tissue. The mean increase in number of microspheres with this approach compared to standard (90)Y glass microsphere dosimetry was 103%, corresponding to an increase from 3.84 to 7.78 million microspheres. Clinical toxicities included fatigue (89 patients, 66%), abdominal pain (49 patients, 36.6%), and nausea/vomiting (25 patients, 18.7%). Grade 3/4 bilirubin toxicity was seen in three patients (2%). Two (1%) of the initial 50-patient cohort showed gastroduodenal ulcers; gastroduodenal ulcers were not seen in any of the subsequent 84 patients. According to WHO and EASL guidelines, response rates were 48% and 57%, respectively, and 21% demonstrated a complete EASL response. CONCLUSION: This study showed sustained safety and efficacy of extended-shelf-life (90)Y glass microspheres in a larger, 134-patient cohort. The increase in number of microspheres administered theoretically resulted in better tumor distribution of the microspheres without an increase in adverse events.
PURPOSE: To validate our initial pilot study and confirm sustained safety and tumor response of extended-shelf-life (90)Y glass microspheres. We hypothesized that for the same planned tissue dose, the increase in number of glass microspheres (decayed to the second week of their allowable shelf-life) administered for the same absorbed dose would result in better tumor distribution of the microspheres without causing additional adverse events. METHODS: Between June 2007 and January 2010, 134 patients underwent radioembolization with extended-shelf-life (90)Y glass microspheres; data from 84 new patients were combined with data from our 50-patient pilot study cohort. Baseline and follow-up imaging and laboratory data were obtained 1 and 3 months after therapy and every 3 months thereafter. Clinical and biochemical toxicities were prospectively captured and categorized according to the Common Terminology Criteria. Response in the index lesion was assessed using WHO and EASL guidelines. RESULTS: The mean delivered radiation dose was 123 Gy to the target liver tissue. The mean increase in number of microspheres with this approach compared to standard (90)Y glass microsphere dosimetry was 103%, corresponding to an increase from 3.84 to 7.78 million microspheres. Clinical toxicities included fatigue (89 patients, 66%), abdominal pain (49 patients, 36.6%), and nausea/vomiting (25 patients, 18.7%). Grade 3/4 bilirubintoxicity was seen in three patients (2%). Two (1%) of the initial 50-patient cohort showed gastroduodenal ulcers; gastroduodenal ulcers were not seen in any of the subsequent 84 patients. According to WHO and EASL guidelines, response rates were 48% and 57%, respectively, and 21% demonstrated a complete EASL response. CONCLUSION: This study showed sustained safety and efficacy of extended-shelf-life (90)Y glass microspheres in a larger, 134-patient cohort. The increase in number of microspheres administered theoretically resulted in better tumor distribution of the microspheres without an increase in adverse events.
Authors: J Bruix; M Sherman; J M Llovet; M Beaugrand; R Lencioni; A K Burroughs; E Christensen; L Pagliaro; M Colombo; J Rodés Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Kent Sato; Robert J Lewandowski; James T Bui; Reed Omary; Russell D Hunter; Laura Kulik; Mary Mulcahy; David Liu; Howard Chrisman; Scott Resnick; Albert A Nemcek; Robert Vogelzang; Riad Salem Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Laura M Kulik; Brian I Carr; Mary F Mulcahy; Robert J Lewandowski; Bassel Atassi; Robert K Ryu; Kent T Sato; Al Benson; Albert A Nemcek; Vanessa L Gates; Michael Abecassis; Reed A Omary; Riad Salem Journal: Hepatology Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Ahsun Riaz; Laura Kulik; Robert J Lewandowski; Robert K Ryu; Georgia Giakoumis Spear; Mary F Mulcahy; Michael Abecassis; Talia Baker; Vanessa Gates; Ritu Nayar; Frank H Miller; Kent T Sato; Reed A Omary; Riad Salem Journal: Hepatology Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Ravi Murthy; Cathy Eng; Sunil Krishnan; David C Madoff; Amit Habbu; Sara Canet; Marshall E Hicks Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Gary W Nace; Jennifer L Steel; Nikhil Amesur; Albert Zajko; Bryon E Nastasi; Judith Joyce; Michael Sheetz; T Clark Gamblin Journal: Int J Surg Oncol Date: 2011-03-20
Authors: E Garin; L Lenoir; J Edeline; S Laffont; H Mesbah; P Porée; L Sulpice; K Boudjema; M Mesbah; A Guillygomarc'h; E Quehen; M Pracht; J L Raoul; B Clement; Y Rolland; E Boucher Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-04-24 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Hyo-Cheol Kim; Myungsu Lee; Jeong-Hoon Lee; Jin Chul Paeng; Yoon Jun Kim; Jin Wook Chung Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Alexander S Pasciak; Godwin Abiola; Robert P Liddell; Nathan Crookston; Sepideh Besharati; Danielle Donahue; Richard E Thompson; Eric Frey; Robert A Anders; Matthew R Dreher; Clifford R Weiss Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-11-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: E Courtney Henry; Matthew Strugari; George Mawko; Kimberly Brewer; David Liu; Andrew C Gordon; Jeffrey N Bryan; Charles Maitz; Robert Abraham; S Cheenu Kappadath; Alasdair Syme Journal: EJNMMI Phys Date: 2022-03-21
Authors: Marta Cremonesi; Carlo Chiesa; Lidia Strigari; Mahila Ferrari; Francesca Botta; Francesco Guerriero; Concetta De Cicco; Guido Bonomo; Franco Orsi; Lisa Bodei; Amalia Di Dia; Chiara Maria Grana; Roberto Orecchia Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 6.244