Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Clinical Interventional Radiology ISVIR 2024; 08(01): 003-010
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1772492
Original Article

Holmium-166 Radioembolization of Hepatic Metastases in Salvage Setting: Preliminary Findings from a Single Center Experience

Murat Dökdök 
1   Department of Radiology, Anadolu Medical Center Hospital, Gebze-Kocaeli, Turkey
,
Kezban Berberoğlu 
2   Department of Nuclear Medicine, Anadolu Medical Center Hospital, Gebze-Kocaeli, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this study is to report the early outcomes of holmium-166 (166Ho) radioembolization in the treatment of liver metastases.

Methods Nine patients with liver metastases originating from different primary sites were treated with 166Ho radioembolization between January 2019 and February 2020. The patients were assessed for pain using a visual analog scale (VAS) and quality of life (QoL) at various intervals during hospitalization and follow-up. Toxicity that may be attributable to radioembolization was graded according to CTCAE v5.0. The tumor dosimetry and tumor response were assessed with anatomic and metabolic imaging.

Results The mean tumor dose was 150 Gy, 95% confidence interval (CI) was 135.2 to 164.8, with a range of 100 to 200 Gy based on single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT, and distribution verified with inline T2/R2* magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) maps. No early (30-day) mortality or grade greater than 2 toxicities were noted, but one patient had chylous ascites. QoL assessed with the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3-Level version (EQ-5D-3L) revealed mean index scores of 0.748 (range: 0.5–1), 95% CI of 0.6 to 0.9, before the procedure, and 0.7 (range: 0.5–1) and 95% CI of 0.6 to 0.8, at 1 month. The mean VAS was 70.6, 95% CI was 65.5 to 75.6, immediately after the procedure, and decreased to the mean VAS of 65.7 and 95% CI of 55.9 to 75.5 after 1 month. Five patients showed a partial response, three showed a stable disease, and one showed progressive disease at the first 2- to 3-month imaging follow-up.

Conclusion Radioembolization with 166Ho microspheres for liver metastases appears to be safe, tolerable, and effective during the short term in this small-scale study.

Keywords

holmium-166 microspheres - radioembolization - liver metastases

Ethical Approval

This is a retrospective case cohort study, which was approved by the institutional ethical committee (protocol number 21–159). Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants.




Publication History

Article published online:
11 September 2023

© 2023. Indian Society of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Nijsen JF, Zonnenberg BA, Woittiez JR. et al. Holmium-166 poly lactic acid microspheres applicable for intra-arterial radionuclide therapy of hepatic malignancies: effects of preparation and neutron activation techniques. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26 (07) 699-704
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Elschot M, Nijsen JFW, Lam MGEH. et al. (99m)Tc-MAA overestimates the absorbed dose to the lungs in radioembolization: a quantitative evaluation in patients treated with 166Ho-microspheres. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41 (10) 1965-1975
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Smits MLJ, Dassen MG, Prince JF. et al. The superior predictive value of 166Ho-scout compared with 99mTc-macroaggregated albumin prior to 166Ho-microspheres radioembolization in patients with liver metastases. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47 (04) 798-806
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Smits ML, Elschot M, van den Bosch MA. et al. In vivo dosimetry based on SPECT and MR imaging of 166Ho-microspheres for treatment of liver malignancies. J Nucl Med 2013; 54 (12) 2093-2100
    Google Scholar
  • 5 van de Maat GH, Seevinck PR, Elschot M. et al. MRI-based biodistribution assessment of holmium-166 poly(L-lactic acid) microspheres after radioembolisation. Eur Radiol 2013; 23 (03) 827-835
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Radosa CG, Radosa JC, Grosche-Schlee S. et al. Holmium-166 radioembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: feasibility and safety of a new treatment option in clinical practice. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2019; 42 (03) 405-412
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Salem R, Thurston KG. Radioembolization with 90yttrium microspheres: a state-of-the-art brachytherapy treatment for primary and secondary liver malignancies. Part 1: technical and methodologic considerations. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2006; 17 (08) 1251-1278
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Prince JF, van den Bosch MAAJ, Nijsen JFW. et al. Efficacy of radioembolization with 166Ho-microspheres in salvage patients with liver metastases: a phase 2 study. J Nucl Med 2018; 59 (04) 582-588
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Mahnken AH, Spreafico C, Maleux G, Helmberger T, Jakobs TF. Standards of practice in transarterial radioembolization. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2013; 36 (03) 613-622
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Nijsen JF, Seppenwoolde JH, Havenith T, Bos C, Bakker CJ, van het Schip AD. Liver tumors: MR imaging of radioactive holmium microspheres—phantom and rabbit study. Radiology 2004; 231 (02) 491-499
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Sangro B, Gil-Alzugaray B, Rodriguez J. et al. Liver disease induced by radioembolization of liver tumors: description and possible risk factors. Cancer 2008; 112 (07) 1538-1546
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Braat MN, van Erpecum KJ, Zonnenberg BA, van den Bosch MA, Lam MG. Radioembolization-induced liver disease: a systematic review. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 29 (02) 144-152
    Google Scholar
  • 13 EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16 (03) 199-208
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Akinwande O, Philips P, Scoggins CR. et al. Comparison of tumor response assessment methods in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer after locoregional therapy. J Surg Oncol 2016; 113 (04) 443-448
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Jongen JMJ, Rosenbaum CENM, Braat MNGJA. et al. Anatomic versus metabolic tumor response assessment after radioembolization treatment. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2018; 29 (02) 244-253.e2
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Smits ML, Nijsen JF, van den Bosch MA. et al. Holmium-166 radioembolisation in patients with unresectable, chemorefractory liver metastases (HEPAR trial): a phase 1, dose-escalation study. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13 (10) 1025-1034
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Mazzaferro V, Sposito C, Bhoori S. et al. Yttrium-90 radioembolization for intermediate-advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase 2 study. Hepatology 2013; 57 (05) 1826-1837
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Golfieri R, Bilbao JI, Carpanese L. et al; European Network on Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 Microspheres (ENRY) study collaborators. Comparison of the survival and tolerability of radioembolization in elderly vs. younger patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2013; 59 (04) 753-761
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Benson III AB, Geschwind JF, Mulcahy MF. et al. Radioembolisation for liver metastases: results from a prospective 151 patient multi-institutional phase II study. Eur J Cancer 2013; 49 (15) 3122-3130
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Meropol NJ, Weinfurt KP, Burnett CB. et al. Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21 (13) 2589-2596
    Google Scholar
  • 21 van Roekel C, Smits MLJ, Prince JF, Bruijnen RCG, van den Bosch MAAJ, Lam MGEH. Quality of life in patients with liver tumors treated with holmium-166 radioembolization. Clin Exp Metastasis 2020; 37 (01) 95-105
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Steel J, Baum A, Carr B. Quality of life in patients diagnosed with primary hepatocellular carcinoma: hepatic arterial infusion of cisplatin versus 90-yttrium microspheres (TheraSphere). Psychooncology 2004; 13 (02) 73-79
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Wasan HS, Gibbs P, Sharma NK. et al; FOXFIRE trial investigators, SIRFLOX trial investigators, FOXFIRE-Global trial investigators. First-line selective internal radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-global): a combined analysis of three multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trials. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18 (09) 1159-1171
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Kim AY, Frantz S, Brower J, Akhter N. Radioembolization with yttrium-90 microspheres for the treatment of liver metastases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a multicenter analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2019; 30 (03) 298-304.e2
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Riaz A, Awais R, Salem R. Side effects of yttrium-90 radioembolization. Front Oncol 2014; 4: 198
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Piana PM, Bar V, Doyle L. et al. Early arterial stasis during resin-based yttrium-90 radioembolization: incidence and preliminary outcomes. HPB (Oxford) 2014; 16 (04) 336-341
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Sofocleous CT, Violari EG, Sotirchos VS. et al. Radioembolization as a salvage therapy for heavily pretreated patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases: factors that affect outcomes. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2015; 14 (04) 296-305
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Sato K, Lewandowski RJ, Bui JT. 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 (04) 522-529
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Boas FE, Bodei L, Sofocleous CT. Radioembolization of colorectal liver metastases: indications, technique, and outcomes. J Nucl Med 2017; 58 (Suppl. 02) 104S-111S
    Google Scholar