OBJECTIVE: Colorectal liver metastases (CLM) have a variable response to radioembolization. This may be due at least partly to differences in tumor arterial perfusion. The present study examines whether quantitative measurements of enhancement on preprocedure triphasic CT can be used to predict the response of CLM to radioembolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with CLM treated with radioembolization who underwent pretreatment PET/CT and triphasic CT examinations and posttreatment PET/CT examinations. A total of 31 consecutive patients with 60 target tumors were included in the present study. For each tumor, we calculated the hepatic artery coefficient (HAC), portal vein coefficient (PVC), and arterial enhancement fraction (AEF) based on enhancement measurements on pretreatment triphasic CT. HAC and PVC are estimates of the hepatic artery and portal vein blood supply. AEF, which is the arterial phase enhancement divided by the portal phase enhancement, provides an estimate of the hepatic artery blood supply as a fraction of the total blood supply. For each tumor, the metabolic response to radioembolization was based on findings from the initial follow-up PET/CT scan obtained at 4-8 weeks after treatment. RESULTS: A total of 55% of CLM had a complete or partial metabolic response. Arterial phase enhancement, the HAC, and the PVC did not predict which tumors responded to radioembolization. However, the AEF was statistically significantly greater in tumors with a complete or partial metabolic response than in tumors with no metabolic response (i.e., those with stable disease or disease progression) (p = 0.038). An AEF of less than 0.4 was associated with a 40% response rate, whereas an AEF greater than 0.75 was associated with a 78% response rate. CONCLUSION: Response to radioembolization can be predicted using the AEF calculated from the preprocedure triphasic CT.
OBJECTIVE:Colorectal liver metastases (CLM) have a variable response to radioembolization. This may be due at least partly to differences in tumor arterial perfusion. The present study examines whether quantitative measurements of enhancement on preprocedure triphasic CT can be used to predict the response of CLM to radioembolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with CLM treated with radioembolization who underwent pretreatment PET/CT and triphasic CT examinations and posttreatment PET/CT examinations. A total of 31 consecutive patients with 60 target tumors were included in the present study. For each tumor, we calculated the hepatic artery coefficient (HAC), portal vein coefficient (PVC), and arterial enhancement fraction (AEF) based on enhancement measurements on pretreatment triphasic CT. HAC and PVC are estimates of the hepatic artery and portal vein blood supply. AEF, which is the arterial phase enhancement divided by the portal phase enhancement, provides an estimate of the hepatic artery blood supply as a fraction of the total blood supply. For each tumor, the metabolic response to radioembolization was based on findings from the initial follow-up PET/CT scan obtained at 4-8 weeks after treatment. RESULTS: A total of 55% of CLM had a complete or partial metabolic response. Arterial phase enhancement, the HAC, and the PVC did not predict which tumors responded to radioembolization. However, the AEF was statistically significantly greater in tumors with a complete or partial metabolic response than in tumors with no metabolic response (i.e., those with stable disease or disease progression) (p = 0.038). An AEF of less than 0.4 was associated with a 40% response rate, whereas an AEF greater than 0.75 was associated with a 78% response rate. CONCLUSION: Response to radioembolization can be predicted using the AEF calculated from the preprocedure triphasic CT.
Authors: F Edward Boas; Aya Kamaya; Bao Do; Terry S Desser; Christopher F Beaulieu; Shreyas S Vasanawala; Gloria L Hwang; Daniel Y Sze Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: Fabian Morsbach; Thomas Pfammatter; Caecilia S Reiner; Michael A Fischer; Bert-Ram Sah; Sebastian Winklhofer; Ernst Klotz; Thomas Frauenfelder; Alexander Knuth; Burkhardt Seifert; Niklaus Schaefer; Hatem Alkadhi Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Kent T Sato; Reed A Omary; Christopher Takehana; Saad Ibrahim; Robert J Lewandowski; Robert K Ryu; Riad Salem Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2009-10-20 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Wolfgang Peter Fendler; Donfack Beauclair Philippe Tiega; Harun Ilhan; Philipp M Paprottka; Volker Heinemann; Tobias F Jakobs; Peter Bartenstein; Marcus Hacker; Alexander Robert Haug Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Bruno Sangro; Belen Gil-Alzugaray; Javier Rodriguez; Iosu Sola; Antonio Martinez-Cuesta; Antonio Viudez; Ana Chopitea; Mercedes Iñarrairaegui; Javier Arbizu; Jose I Bilbao Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: F Edward Boas; Etay Ziv; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Karen T Brown; Joseph P Erinjeri; Constantinos T Sofocleous; James J Harding; Stephen B Solomon Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: F Edward Boas; Nancy E Kemeny; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Randy Yeh; Vanessa R Thompson; Meier Hsu; Chaya S Moskowitz; Etay Ziv; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Achiude Bendet; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Radiology Date: 2021-08-31 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jonathan R Strosberg; Ghassan El-Haddad; Taymeyah Al-Toubah; Diane Reidy; Etay Ziv; Armeen Mahvash; Arvind Dasari; Philip Philip; Michael C Soulen Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-09-23 Impact factor: 11.082
Authors: Alessandra Borgheresi; Adrian Gonzalez-Aguirre; Karen T Brown; George I Getrajdman; Joseph P Erinjeri; Anne Covey; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Etay Ziv; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Franz Edward Boas Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Fuad Nurili; Sebastien Monette; Adam O Michel; Achiude Bendet; Olca Basturk; Gokce Askan; Christopher Cheleuitte-Nieves; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Aaron W P Maxwell; Etay Ziv; Kyle M Schachtschneider; Ron C Gaba; Lawrence B Schook; Stephen B Solomon; F Edward Boas Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2021-01-23 Impact factor: 3.464