Abstract
Objective
Yttrium-90 radioembolisation (Y90-RE) is recommended for unresectable, chemorefractory liver-dominant disease; however, the incidence of extrahepatic disease (EHD) is high. FDG-PET may have additional value to CT in demonstrating EHD. Our aim was to evaluate the added diagnostic value of FDG-PET to abdominal CT and study the influence of FDG-PET findings on treatment decisions.
Methods
All consecutive patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) referred for Y90-RE were included. Patients who underwent both CT and FDG-PET in the diagnostic workup were selected. Imaging reports were scrutinised for documented sites of EHD, and changes of management due to FDG-PET findings were determined.
Results
A total of 42 patients were included. Findings on CT and FDG-PET matched in 20 patients (no EHD, n = 15; identical EHD, n = 5). In 4 patients, lesions detected on CT were not FDG-avid, and in 18 patients, FDG-PET showed more lesions than CT (P < 0.05). In 7/42 patients (17 %) a change of management was made based on the additional FDG-PET findings, i.e. exclusion from Y90-RE treatment (n = 6) and change in treatment plan (whole liver rather than segmental treatment, n = 1).
Conclusions
In patients with CRCLM referred for Y90-RE, FDG-PET showed significantly more EHD and led to a considerable change of management.
Key Points
• Yttrium-90 radioembolisation is a locoregional treatment for liver tumours
• Detection of extrahepatic lesions, for which CT is widely used, is crucial
• FDG-PET shows significantly more extrahepatic lesions compared to CT
• FDG-PET findings led to a considerable change in treatment decisions
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Coldwell D, Sangro B, Salem R, Wasan H, Kennedy A (2012) Radioembolization in the treatment of unresectable liver tumors: experience across a range of primary cancers. Am J Clin Oncol 35:167–177
Kennedy AS, McNeillie P, Dezarn WA et al (2009) Treatment parameters and outcome in 680 treatments of internal radiation with resin 90Y-microspheres for unresectable hepatic tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74:1494–1500
Murthy R, Brown DB, Salem R et al (2007) Gastrointestinal complications associated with hepatic arterial yttrium-90 microsphere therapy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18:553–561, quiz 562
Vente MA, Wondergem M, van der Tweel I et al (2009) Yttrium-90 microsphere radioembolization for the treatment of liver malignancies: a structured meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 19:951–959
Dezarn WA, Cessna JT, DeWerd LA et al (2011) Recommendations of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine on dosimetry, imaging, and quality assurance procedures for 90Y microsphere brachytherapy in the treatment of hepatic malignancies. Med Phys 38:4824–4845
Lewandowski RJ, Sato KT, Atassi B et al (2007) Radioembolization with 90Y microspheres: angiographic and technical considerations. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 30:571–592
Hendlisz A, Eynde MVD, Peeters M et al (2010) Phase III trial comparing protracted intravenous fluorouracil infusion alone or with yttrium-90 resin microspheres radioembolization for liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 28:3687–3694
Kennedy A, Coldwell D, Nutting C et al (2006) Resin 90Y-microsphere brachytherapy for unresectable colorectal liver metastases: modern USA experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 65:412–425
Stubbs RS, O’Brien I, Correia MM (2006) Selective internal radiation therapy with 90y microspheres for colorectal liver metastases: single-centre experience with 100 patients. ANZ J Surg 76:696–703
Van Hazel G, Blackwell A, Anderson J et al (2004) Randomised phase 2 trial of SIR-Spheres® plus fluorouracil/leucovorin chemotherapy versus fluorouracil/leucovorin chemotherapy alone in advanced colorectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 88:78–85
Gray B, Van Hazel GA, Hope M et al (2001) Randomised trial of SIR-Spheres® plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone for treating patients with liver metastases from primary large bowel cancer. Ann Oncol 12:1711–1720
Chua TC, Bester L, Saxena A, Morris DL (2010) Radioembolization and systemic chemotherapy improves response and survival for unresectable colorectal liver metastases. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 137:865–873
Cosimelli M, Golfieri R, Cagol PP et al (2010) Multi-centre phase II clinical trial of yttrium-90 resin microspheres alone in unresectable, chemotherapy refractory colorectal liver metastases. Br J Cancer 103:324–331
Coldwell D, Sangro B, Wasan H, Salem R, Kennedy A (2011) General selection criteria of patients for radioembolization of liver tumors: an international working group report. Am J Clin Oncol 34:337–341
Kennedy A, Nag S, Salem R et al (2007) 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 68:13–23
Giammarile F, Bodei L, Chiesa C et al (2011) EANM procedure guideline for the treatment of liver cancer and liver metastases with intra-arterial radioactive compounds. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:1393–1406
Denecke T, Rühl R, Hildebrandt B et al (2008) Planning transarterial radioembolization of colorectal liver metastases with yttrium 90 microspheres: evaluation of a sequential diagnostic approach using radiologic and nuclear medicine imaging techniques. Eur Radiol 18:892–902
Kennedy A, Coldwell D, Sangro B, Wasan H, Salem R (2012) Radioembolization for the treatment of liver tumors general principles. Am J Clin Oncol 35:91–99
Mulcahy MF, Lewandowski RJ, Ibrahim SM et al (2009) Radioembolization of colorectal hepatic metastases using yttrium-90 microspheres. Cancer 115:1849–1858
Bester L, Meteling B, Pocock N et al (2012) Radioembolization versus standard care of hepatic metastases: comparative retrospective cohort study of survival outcomes and adverse events in salvage patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 23:96–105
Nace GW, Steel JL, Amesur N et al (2011) Yttrium-90 radioembolization for colorectal cancer liver metastases: a single institution experience. Int J Surg Oncol 2011:1–9. doi:10.1155/2011/571261
Povoski SP, Fong Y, Sgouros SC, Kemeny NE, Downey RJ, Blumgart LH (1998) Role of chest CT in patients with negative chest x-rays referred for hepatic colorectal metastases. Ann Surg Oncol 5:9–15
Kronawitter U, Kemeny NE, Heelan R, Fata F, Fong Y (1999) Evaluation of chest computed tomography in the staging of patients with potentially resectable liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 86:229–235
Strasberg SM, Dehdashti F (2010) Role of FDG-PET staging in selecting the optimum patient for hepatic resection of metastatic colorectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 102:955–959
Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd JE et al (2000) A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med 41:1177–1189
Ruers TJM, Wiering B, van der Sijp JRM et al (2009) improved selection of patients for hepatic surgery of colorectal liver metastases with 18F-FDG PET: a randomized study. J Nucl Med 50:1036–1041
Wiering B, Adang EMM, van der Sijp JRM et al (2010) Added value of positron emission tomography imaging in the surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Nucl Med Commun 31:938–944
Vach W, Hoilund-Carlsen PF, Gerke O, Weber WA (2011) Generating evidence for clinical benefit of PET/CT in diagnosing cancer patients. J Nucl Med 52:77S–85S
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rosenbaum, C.E.N.M., van den Bosch, M.A.A.J., Veldhuis, W.B. et al. Added value of FDG-PET imaging in the diagnostic workup for yttrium-90 radioembolisation in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases. Eur Radiol 23, 931–937 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2693-x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2693-x