Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Continuing Education
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Continuing Education
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
LetterLetters to the Editor

99mTc-MAA–Based Dosimetry for Liver Cancer Treated Using 90Y-Loaded Microspheres: Known Proof of Effectiveness

Etienne Garin, Eveline Boucher and Yan Rolland
Journal of Nuclear Medicine August 2014, 55 (8) 1391-1392; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.137422
Etienne Garin
*Eugène Marquis Cancer Institute rue de la Bataille Flandres-Dunkerque, CS44229 F-35042 Rennes Cedex, France E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: e.garin@rennes.unicancer.fr
Eveline Boucher
*Eugène Marquis Cancer Institute rue de la Bataille Flandres-Dunkerque, CS44229 F-35042 Rennes Cedex, France E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: e.garin@rennes.unicancer.fr
Yan Rolland
*Eugène Marquis Cancer Institute rue de la Bataille Flandres-Dunkerque, CS44229 F-35042 Rennes Cedex, France E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: e.garin@rennes.unicancer.fr
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

TO THE EDITOR: It was with great interest that we read the study by Lam et al. entitled “Prognostic Utility of 90Y Radioembolization Dosimetry Based on Fusion 99mTc-Macroaggregated Albumin–99mTc-Sulfur Colloid SPECT,” published in December 2013 (1). In this paper, the authors described an original method based on 99mTc-macroaggregated albumin (99mTc-MAA) and 99mTc-sulfur colloid (99mTc-SC) SPECT to be used for segmentation between tumors and healthy liver tissue in the context of liver metastases. Mean tumor and healthy-liver doses were then calculated using the MIRD formalism. The study findings revealed a strong correlation between tumor dose and both response to 90Y-loaded resin microspheres and survival in a cohort of patients with liver metastases treated using 90Y-loaded resin microspheres.

Several questions or comments can be raised in response to this publication.

The study excluded patients with mismatch between 99mTc-MAA and subsequent 90Y-microsphere injection site or failure. We believe it would be worth providing a clear definition of “injection site” and “injection failure.” In addition, an evaluation of the number of patients meeting these definitions would be useful for the purpose of assessing the number for which the pretherapeutic dosimetry proved accurate.

Mean tumor dose was 44.2 Gy for responding lesions, yet the authors did not establish a threshold tumor dose. We would be highly interested to see the additional results that were not reported, such as receiver-operating-characteristic analysis with tumor-absorbed dose as a marker and nonresponders as a control group (area under curve; sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy with a threshold tumor dose equal to the minimum value of the responding group). A comparison with data previously published by our group (2,3) could also provide helpful insight.

For the segmentation process, the authors used both a tumor map (based on 99mTc-MAA and 99mTc-SC uptake) and a fixed threshold (applied on both 99mTc-MAA SPECT and 99mTc-SC SPECT) in order to avoid manual segmentation. A fixed threshold is an interesting choice, given this method’s advantages of being neither operator-dependent nor time-consuming. These benefits are of particular interest in the context of multifocal diseases such as metastases. Yet the use of a fixed threshold has been recognized as producing less than optimal results at a lesion level (4,5). The authors have offered an interesting clinical validation of the concept in the context of multifocal disease.

In the “Discussion” section, this publication made mention of the approach previously used by our team for hepatocellular carcinoma patients (2), stating that “this modified partition method has clear advantages over existing methods with regard to tumor dosimetry but has several important limitations: normal-liver tissue dosimetry and toxicity are not addressed….” This is incorrect, given that for both compartments (tumors and healthy liver) the mean doses were calculated using the MIRD approach. The only difference consisted of which segmentation process was used, namely 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT fusion in our study and 99mTc-MAA SPECT/99mTc-SC SPECT fusion in theirs. In our study, we described both normal-liver dosimetry (mean healthy injected liver dose of 79.9 ± 24.5 Gy) and liver toxicity (2), finding no correlation between the healthy-liver dose and liver toxicity. Seven liver toxicity cases were noted, 3 involving an injected healthy-liver dose of less than 100 Gy delivered during treatment, and 5 an injected healthy-liver dose of more than 100 Gy, without any other toxicity. These results can be accounted for by the fact that, in our study, we treated only a single liver lobe rather than the entire organ. More recently, we applied the same approach and demonstrated that the combination of a healthy-liver dose of more than 120 Gy and hepatic reserve (percentage of nonirradiated liver volume) less than 30% constituted an independent factor of permanent severe liver toxicity on multivariate analysis (3).

This point is of particular significance, given that it is not mandatory to perform a supplementary 99mTc-SC SPECT acquisition in order to achieve an accurate dosimetric evaluation (especially for the healthy liver), or at least not for hepatocellular carcinoma, since 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT dosimetry may also prove accurate (2,3,6–8) if performed correctly (9). Using a fixed threshold also offers us the opportunity of achieving segmentation between tumors and healthy liver tissue with 99mTc-MAA SPECT. We would be highly interested to see a comparison of 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT–based dosimetry using a fixed threshold versus the methodologic approach developed in this paper. This would confirm for us which approach is the most accurate, along with whether performing an additional 99mTc-SC SPECT study is mandatory in the context of multifocal diseases such as metastatic disease.

All in all, although the presented results still require confirmation using a larger patient cohort, we can still remark that this study has brought to light additional evidence supporting the predictive power of 99mTc-MAA–based pretreatment dosimetry. New additional findings have also been published concerning how tumor dose correlates with response, overall survival, and liver tolerance. This finding is of particular interest for the following 3 reasons. First, given that 99mTc-MAA dosimetry is available before therapy initiation, it can lead to a fully personalized approach in selecting patients who, according to a 99mTc-MAA–based dosimetric estimation, are most likely to respond, as well as to a more efficient identification of patients at risk of liver failure and even to an intensification of the treatment, as has recently been suggested (3,10). Second, a more personalized oncologic approach using 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT dosimetry and intensification for hepatocarcinoma patients with portal vein thrombosis produced positive results, with an overall survival rate reaching 24 mo (3). This kind of approach may also improve metastatic patient outcome. Lastly, this type of powerful, pretherapeutic predictor of response and survival represents a clear advantage of radioembolization. This advantage is unfortunately not available with other therapeutic approaches used for liver cancer, such as chemotherapy, biotherapy, or chemoembolization.

DISCLOSURE

Etienne Garin is a consultant for Biocompatibles U.K. Ltd.

Footnotes

  • Published online ▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪.

  • © 2014 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Inc.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Lam MGEH,
    2. Goris ML,
    3. Iagaru AH,
    4. Mittra ES,
    5. Louie JD,
    6. Sze DY
    . Prognostic utility of 90Y radioembolization dosimetry based on fusion 99mTc-macroaggregated albumin–99mTc-sulfur colloid SPECT. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:2055–2061.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Garin E,
    2. Lenoir L,
    3. Rolland Y,
    4. et al
    . 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT based dosimetry accurately predicts tumour response and survival in HCC patients treated with 90Y-loaded glass microspheres: preliminary results. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:255–263.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Garin E,
    2. Lenoir L,
    3. Edeline J,
    4. et al
    . Boosted selective internal radiation therapy with 90Y-loaded glass microspheres (B-SIRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma patients: a new personalized promising concept. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1057–1068.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Erdi YE,
    2. Wessels BW,
    3. Loew MH,
    4. et al
    . Threshold estimation in single photon emission computed tomography and planar imaging for clinical radioimmunotherapy. Cancer Res. 1995;55(23, suppl)5823s–5826s.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Garin E,
    2. Lenoir L,
    3. Rolland Y,
    4. et al
    . Effectiveness of quantitative MAA SPECT/CT for the definition of vascularized hepatic volume and dosimetric approach: phantom validation and clinical preliminary results in patients with complex hepatic vascularization treated with yttrium-90-labeled microspheres. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32:1245–1255.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    Chiesa C, Maccauro M, Romito C, et al. Need, feasibility and convenience of dosimetric treatment planning in liver selective internal radiation therapy with 90Y microspheres. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;55:168–197.
  7. 7.
    1. Kao YH,
    2. Hock Tan AE,
    3. Burgmans MC,
    4. et al
    . Image-guided personalized predictive dosimetry by artery-specific SPECT/CT partition modeling for safe and effective 90Y radioembolization. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:559–566.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Flamen P,
    2. Vanderlinde B,
    3. Delatte P,
    4. et al
    . Multimodality imaging can predict the metabolic response of unresectable colorectal liver metastases to radioembolization therapy with yttrium-90 labeled resin microspheres. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:6591–6603.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Chiesa C,
    2. Lambert B,
    3. Maccauro M,
    4. et al
    . Pretreatment dosimetry in HCC radioembolization with 90Y glass microspheres cannot be invalidated with a bare visual evaluation of 99mTc-MAA uptake of colorectal metastases treated with resin microspheres. J Nucl Med. In press.
  10. 10.↵
    1. Chiesa C,
    2. Miro M,
    3. Maccauro M,
    4. et al
    . Comparison of standard versus dosimetrically individualized treatment in intermediated/advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) radioembolization with glass microspheres. EANM ’13 website. http://eanm13.eanm.org/abstracts/session_detail.php?sessionNumber=1704&referer=/programme/prog_20131023.php?navId=0. Accessed May 27, 2014.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 55 (8)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 55, Issue 8
August 1, 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
99mTc-MAA–Based Dosimetry for Liver Cancer Treated Using 90Y-Loaded Microspheres: Known Proof of Effectiveness
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
99mTc-MAA–Based Dosimetry for Liver Cancer Treated Using 90Y-Loaded Microspheres: Known Proof of Effectiveness
Etienne Garin, Eveline Boucher, Yan Rolland
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Aug 2014, 55 (8) 1391-1392; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.114.137422

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
99mTc-MAA–Based Dosimetry for Liver Cancer Treated Using 90Y-Loaded Microspheres: Known Proof of Effectiveness
Etienne Garin, Eveline Boucher, Yan Rolland
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Aug 2014, 55 (8) 1391-1392; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.114.137422
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Technologist Approach to Global Dose Optimization
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Theranostic Digital Twins: An Indispensable Prerequisite for Personalized Cancer Care
  • Dosimetry in Radiopharmaceutical Therapy
  • Reply: Dosimetry in Radiopharmaceutical Therapy
Show more Letters to the Editor

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2023 Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Powered by HighWire