I Kurilova1,2,3, R G H Beets-Tan2,3, G A Ulaner4, F E Boas1, E N Petre1, H Yarmohammadi1, E Ziv1, A R Deipolyi1, L A Brody1, M Gonen5, Constantinos T Sofocleous6. 1. Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 4. Molecular Imaging and Therapy Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA. 6. Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. sofoclec@mskcc.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess safety and efficacy of 90Y resin microspheres administration using undiluted non-ionic contrast material (UDCM) {100% Omnipaque-300 (Iohexol)} in both the "B" and "D" lines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed all colorectal cancer liver metastases patients treated with 90Y resin microspheres radioembolization (RAE) from 2009 to 2017. As of April 2013, two experienced operators started using UDCM (study group) instead of standard sandwich infusion (control group). Occurrence of myelosuppression (leukopenia, neutropenia, erythrocytopenia or/and thrombocytopenia), stasis, nontarget delivery (NTD), median fluoroscopy radiation dose (FRD), median infusion time (IT), liver progression-free (LPFS) and overall survivals (OS) was evaluated. Complications within 6 months post-RAE were reported according to CTCAE v3.0 criteria. RESULTS: Study and control groups comprised 23(28%) and 58(72%) patients, respectively. Median follow-up was 9.1 months. There was no statistically significant difference in myelosuppression incidence within 6 months post-RAE between groups. Median FRD and IT for study and control groups were 44.6 vs. 97.35 Gy/cm2 (p = 0.048) and 31 vs. 39 min (p = 0.006), respectively. A 38% lower stasis incidence in study group was not significant (p = 0.34). NTD occurred in 1/27(4%) study vs. 5/73(7%) control group procedures (p = 1). Grade 1-2 and grade 3-4 toxicities between study and control group patients were 36%(8/22) vs. 45%(26/58), p = 0.61 and 9%(2/22) vs. 16%(9/58), p = 0.72, respectively. There was no difference in LPFS and OS between groups. CONCLUSION: Administration of 90Y resin microspheres using UDCM in both lines is safe and effective, resulting in lower fluoroscopy radiation dose and shorter infusion time, without evidence of myelosuppression or increased stasis incidence.
OBJECTIVES: To assess safety and efficacy of 90Y resin microspheres administration using undiluted non-ionic contrast material (UDCM) {100% Omnipaque-300 (Iohexol)} in both the "B" and "D" lines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed all colorectal cancer liver metastasespatients treated with 90Y resin microspheres radioembolization (RAE) from 2009 to 2017. As of April 2013, two experienced operators started using UDCM (study group) instead of standard sandwich infusion (control group). Occurrence of myelosuppression (leukopenia, neutropenia, erythrocytopenia or/and thrombocytopenia), stasis, nontarget delivery (NTD), median fluoroscopy radiation dose (FRD), median infusion time (IT), liver progression-free (LPFS) and overall survivals (OS) was evaluated. Complications within 6 months post-RAE were reported according to CTCAE v3.0 criteria. RESULTS: Study and control groups comprised 23(28%) and 58(72%) patients, respectively. Median follow-up was 9.1 months. There was no statistically significant difference in myelosuppression incidence within 6 months post-RAE between groups. Median FRD and IT for study and control groups were 44.6 vs. 97.35 Gy/cm2 (p = 0.048) and 31 vs. 39 min (p = 0.006), respectively. A 38% lower stasis incidence in study group was not significant (p = 0.34). NTD occurred in 1/27(4%) study vs. 5/73(7%) control group procedures (p = 1). Grade 1-2 and grade 3-4 toxicities between study and control group patients were 36%(8/22) vs. 45%(26/58), p = 0.61 and 9%(2/22) vs. 16%(9/58), p = 0.72, respectively. There was no difference in LPFS and OS between groups. CONCLUSION: Administration of 90Y resin microspheres using UDCM in both lines is safe and effective, resulting in lower fluoroscopy radiation dose and shorter infusion time, without evidence of myelosuppression or increased stasis incidence.
Authors: William A Dezarn; Jeffery T Cessna; Larry A DeWerd; Wenzheng Feng; Vanessa L Gates; James Halama; Andrew S Kennedy; Subir Nag; Mehrdad Sarfaraz; Varun Sehgal; Reed Selwyn; Michael G Stabin; Bruce R Thomadsen; Lawrence E Williams; Riad Salem Journal: Med Phys Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Al B Benson; Alan P Venook; Lynette Cederquist; Emily Chan; Yi-Jen Chen; Harry S Cooper; Dustin Deming; Paul F Engstrom; Peter C Enzinger; Alessandro Fichera; Jean L Grem; Axel Grothey; Howard S Hochster; Sarah Hoffe; Steven Hunt; Ahmed Kamel; Natalie Kirilcuk; Smitha Krishnamurthi; Wells A Messersmith; Mary F Mulcahy; James D Murphy; Steven Nurkin; Leonard Saltz; Sunil Sharma; David Shibata; John M Skibber; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Elena M Stoffel; Eden Stotsky-Himelfarb; Christopher G Willett; Christina S Wu; Kristina M Gregory; Deborah Freedman-Cass Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Andrew S Kennedy; Charles Nutting; Douglas Coldwell; James Gaiser; Cinthia Drachenberg Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alain Hendlisz; Marc Van den Eynde; Marc Peeters; Geert Maleux; Bieke Lambert; Jaarke Vannoote; Katrien De Keukeleire; Chris Verslype; Luc Defreyne; Eric Van Cutsem; Philippe Delatte; Thierry Delaunoit; Nicola Personeni; Marianne Paesmans; Jean-Luc Van Laethem; Patrick Flamen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-06-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Andrew Kennedy; Subir Nag; Riad Salem; Ravi Murthy; Alexander J McEwan; Charles Nutting; Al Benson; Joseph Espat; Jose Ignacio Bilbao; Ricky A Sharma; James P Thomas; Douglas Coldwell Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Peachy Mae Piana; Voichita Bar; Laura Doyle; Rani Anne; Takami Sato; David J Eschelman; Jeffrey W McCann; Carin F Gonsalves; Daniel B Brown Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Constantinos T Sofocleous; Alessandra R Garcia; Neeta Pandit-Taskar; Kinh G Do; Lynn A Brody; Elena N Petre; Marinela Capanu; Anne P Longing; Joanne F Chou; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Nancy E Kemeny Journal: Clin Colorectal Cancer Date: 2013-11-13 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Ieva Kurilova; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Jessica Flynn; Mithat Gönen; Gary Ulaner; Elena N Petre; F Edward Boas; Etay Ziv; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Elisabeth G Klompenhouwer; Andrea Cercek; Nancy A Kemeny; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: Clin Colorectal Cancer Date: 2018-09-13 Impact factor: 4.481
Authors: I Kurilova; A Bendet; E K Fung; E N Petre; J L Humm; F E Boas; C H Crane; N Kemeny; T P Kingham; A Cercek; M I D'Angelica; R G H Beets-Tan; C T Sofocleous Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2021-02-19