Advertisement

Sustained safety and efficacy of extended-shelf-life 90Y glass microspheres: long-term follow-up in a 134-patient cohort

  • Robert J. LewandowskiEmail author
  • Jeet Minocha
  • Khairuddin Memon
  • Ahsun Riaz
  • Vanessa L. Gates
  • Robert K. Ryu
  • Kent T. Sato
  • Reed Omary
  • Riad Salem
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To validate our initial pilot study and confirm sustained safety and tumor response of extended-shelf-life 90Y 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 90Y 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 90Y 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 90Y 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.

Keywords

Extended-shelf-life 90Y glass microspheres Radioembolization Liver cancer 

Notes

Conflicts of interest

This research was not sponsored by an organization. Riad Salem is a paid consultant to Nordion. Robert J. Lewandowski is an advisor to Nordion. The remaining authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Gates VL, Nutting CW, Murthy R, Rose SC, et al. Research reporting standards for radioembolization of hepatic malignancies. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011;22:265–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Memon K, Kulik L, Lewandowski RJ, Wang E, Riaz A, Ryu RK, et al. Radiographic response to locoregional therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma predicts patient survival times. Gastroenterology. 2011;141:526–35; 535.e521-522.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coldwell D, Sangro B, Salem R, Wasan H, Kennedy A. Radioembolization in the treatment of unresectable liver tumors: experience across a range of primary cancers. Am J Clin Oncol. 2012;35:167–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nace GW, Steel JL, Amesur N, Zajko A, Nastasi BE, Joyce J, et al. Yttrium-90 radioembolization for colorectal cancer liver metastases: a single institution experience. Int J Surg Oncol. 2011;2011:571261.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Therasphere yttrium-90 microspheres [package insert]. Kanata, Canada: MDS Nordion; 2004.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    SIR-Spheres yttrium-90 microspheres [package insert]. Lane Cove, Australia: Sirtex Medical; 2004.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murthy R, Eng C, Krishnan S, Madoff DC, Habbu A, Canet S, et al. Hepatic yttrium-90 radioembolotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007;18:1588–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kennedy A, Nag S, Salem R, Murthy R, McEwan AJ, Nutting C, et al. Recommendations for radioembolization of hepatic malignancies using yttrium-90 microsphere brachytherapy: a consensus panel report from the radioembolization brachytherapy oncology consortium. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:13–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lewandowski RJ, Riaz A, Ryu RK, Mulcahy MF, Sato KT, Kulik LM, et al. Optimization of radioembolic effect with extended-shelf-life yttrium-90 microspheres: results from a pilot study. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;20:1557–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Campbell AM, Bailey IH, Burton MA. Analysis of the distribution of intra-arterial microspheres in human liver following hepatic yttrium-90 microsphere therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2000;45:1023–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Atassi B, Gordon SC, Gates VL, Barakat O, et al. Treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with use of 90Y microspheres (TheraSphere): safety, tumor response, and survival. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005;16:1627–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lewandowski RJ, Sato KT, Atassi B, Ryu RK, Nemcek Jr AA, Kulik L, et al. Radioembolization with 90Y microspheres: angiographic and technical considerations. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007;30:571–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, Beaugrand M, Lencioni R, Burroughs AK, et al. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver. J Hepatol. 2001;35:421–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Riaz A, Kulik L, Lewandowski RJ, Ryu RK, Giakoumis Spear G, Mulcahy MF, et al. Radiologic-pathologic correlation of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with internal radiation using yttrium-90 microspheres. Hepatology. 2009;49:1185–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Trotti A, Colevas AD, Setser A, Rusch V, Jaques D, Budach V, et al. CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2003;13:176–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Salem R, Thurston KG. Radioembolization with yttrium-90 microspheres: a state-of-the-art brachytherapy treatment for primary and secondary liver malignancies: part 3: comprehensive literature review and future direction. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17:1571–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sato K, Lewandowski RJ, Bui JT, Omary R, Hunter RD, Kulik L, et al. Treatment of unresectable primary and metastatic liver cancer with yttrium-90 microspheres (TheraSphere): assessment of hepatic arterial embolization. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2006;29:522–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Salem R, Lewandowski R, Roberts C, Goin J, Thurston K, Abouljoud M, et al. Use of yttrium-90 glass microspheres (TheraSphere) for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with portal vein thrombosis. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004;15:335–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kulik LM, Carr BI, Mulcahy MF, Lewandowski RJ, Atassi B, Ryu RK, et al. Safety and efficacy of 90Y radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with and without portal vein thrombosis. Hepatology. 2008;47:71–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Murthy R, Xiong H, Nunez R, Cohen AC, Barron B, Szklaruk J, et al. Yttrium 90 resin microspheres for the treatment of unresectable colorectal hepatic metastases after failure of multiple chemotherapy regimens: preliminary results. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005;16:937–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koukourakis MI. Tumour angiogenesis and response to radiotherapy. Anticancer Res. 2001;21:4285–300.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vouche M, Lewandowski RJ, Atassi R, Memon K, Gates VL, Ryu RK, et al. Radiation lobectomy: time-dependent analysis of future liver remnant volume in unresectable liver cancer as a bridge to resection. J Hepatol. 2013;13:S0168–8278.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Garin E, Lenoir L, Edeline J, Laffont S, Mesbah H, Porée P, et al. Boosted selective internal radiation therapy with (90)Y-loaded glass microspheres (B-SIRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma patients: a new personalized promising concept. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1057–68.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Edeline J, Lenoir L, Boudjema K, Rolland Y, Boulic A, Le Du F, et al. Volumetric changes after (90)Y radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: an option to portal vein embolization in a preoperative setting? Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2518–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert J. Lewandowski
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jeet Minocha
    • 1
  • Khairuddin Memon
    • 1
  • Ahsun Riaz
    • 1
  • Vanessa L. Gates
    • 1
  • Robert K. Ryu
    • 1
  • Kent T. Sato
    • 1
  • Reed Omary
    • 1
  • Riad Salem
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations