4.7 Article

Selective internal radiation therapy in patients with progressive neuroendocrine liver metastases

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-015-3264-6

Keywords

Selective internal radiation therapy; Neuroendocrine liver metastases; Transarterial; Yttrium

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To evaluate the safety and efficacy of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) in patients with unresectable liver metastases from neuroendocrine tumours (NETLMs). Methods This retrospective study included 40 patients with progressive NETLMs (22 women, 18 men, mean age 61.6 years) who underwent SIRT with Y-90-labelled resin microspheres. Tumour response was evaluated according to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) on CT or MR images. Medical records were reviewed. Results In the 40 patients, 54 evaluable SIRT procedures were performed, 33 to the right liver lobe (mean activity 1.31 GBq), 13 to the left lobe (mean activity 0.85 GBq), and 8 to both lobes (mean activity 1.61 GBq). Late follow-up imaging (mean 20 months) was performed after 44 of the treatments. Objective tumour response and disease control rates were 54 % (29 of 54 treatments) and 94 % (51 treatments), respectively, at the early follow-up examination (mean 3 months) and 34 % (15 treatments) and 57 % (25 treatments), respectively at the late follow-up examination. Mean overall survival from the first SIRT was 34,8 months and survival rates at 1, 2, 3 and 5 years were 76 %, 59 %, 52 % and 35 % respectively. Adverse effects were generally mild and easily manageable, except in one patient who died from radiation-induced liver failure. Of the 45 patients, 18 (45 %) had received peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) prior to SIRT. Conclusion SIRT with Y-90-labelled resin microspheres is a safe and effective treatment for patients with progressive NETLM, and also for those who have received prior PRRT.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available