The membership of the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) Standards of Practice Committee represents experts in a broad spectrum of interventional procedures from the private and academic sectors of medicine. Generally, Standards of Practice Committee members dedicate the vast majority of their professional time to performing interventional procedures; as such, they represent a valid broad expert constituency of the subject matter under consideration for standards production.Technical documents specifying the exact consensus and literature review methodologies as well as the institutional affiliations and professional credentials of the authors of this document are available upon request from SIR, 3975 Fair Ridge Dr., Suite 400 N., Fairfax, VA 22033. METHODOLOGYSIR produces its Standards of Practice documents using the following process. Standards documents of relevance and timeliness are conceptualized by the Standards of Practice Committee members. A recognized expert is identified to serve as the principal author for the standard. Additional authors may be assigned dependent upon the magnitude of the project.An in-depth literature search is performed using electronic medical literature databases. Then, a critical review of peer-reviewed articles is performed with regard to the study methodology, results, and conclusions. The qualitative weight of these articles is assembled into an evidence table, which is used to write the document such that it contains evidence-based data with respect to content, rates, and thresholds (Fig E1 and Table E1, available online at www.jvir.org).When the evidence of literature is weak, conflicting, or contradictory, consensus for the parameter is reached by a minimum of 12 Standards of Practice Committee members using a modified Delphi consensus method (Appendix A). For purposes of these documents, consensus is defined as 80% Delphi participant agreement on a value or parameter.The draft document is critically reviewed by the Standards of Practice Committee members by telephone conference calling or face-to-face meeting. The finalized draft from the Committee is sent to the SIR membership for further input/criticism during a 30-day comment period. These comments are discussed by the Standards of Practice Committee, and appropriate revisions are made to create the finished standards document. Prior to its publication, the document is endorsed by the SIR Executive Council.

SIR DISCLAIMERSIR develops standards to provide educational resources to practicing clinicians to promote high-quality outcomes and patient safety in vascular and interventional radiology. The standards are not fixed rules, nor are they the sole determinant of treatment choice, and they are not intended to establish a legal standard of care. The use of the standards is voluntary, and a deviation from the recommendations should not automatically be interpreted as the delivery of care that is substandard. The standards are not intended to supplant professional judgment, and a physician may deviate from these guidelines, as necessitated by individual patients, practice setting, or available resources. Other sources of information may be used in conjunction with these principles to produce a process leading to high-quality medical care. The ultimate judgment regarding the conduct of any specific procedure or course of management must be made by the physician, who should consider all circumstances relevant to the individual clinical situation. These standards are provided "AS IS," and SIR does not warrant the accuracy, reliability, completeness, or timeliness of the standards. SIR is not responsible for any actions taken in reliance on these standards, including, but not limited to, any treatment decisions made by any health care provider reading these guidelines, and SIR assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or related to any use of these guidelines or for any errors or omissions.

3143 Background: PV-10 is a small molecule autolytic immunotherapy in clinical development for treatment of solid tumors. When administered by intralesional (IL) injection, PV-10 can produce immunogenic cell death that may induce a T cell-mediated immune response against treatment refractory and immunologically cold tumors. Given this mechanism of action and clinical data that metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM) generates low response rates to immune checkpoint blockade (CB), we investigated treatment of MUM with percutaneously-delivered PV-10. Methods: This open-label Phase 1 basket study (NCT00986661) is evaluating the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of intralesional PV-10 in patients (pts) with solid tumors of the liver. PV-10 is injected into one or more designated hepatic tumor(s) with a maximum sum of diameters ≤4.9 cm. Response assessments using 2D EASL criteria are performed at Day 28, then every 3 months. Pts with additional injectable tumors are eligible to receive further PV-10 after Day 28. Pts can receive standard of care CB immunotherapy during treatment with PV-10. Results: As of February 1, 2020, the initial cohort of 15 pts with MUM to the liver was fully enrolled. Pts had received at least 1 IL injection of PV-10, with an average of 2 hepatic lesions injected per pt (range 1-4). Of these, 4 pts were refractory to prior CB. Three pts received PV-10 alone, 3 received PV-10 + anti-PD-1 and 9 received PV-10 + anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with established patterns for PV-10 and CB: AEs attributed to PV-10 were transient and included 3 cases of Grade 3/4 transaminitis that resolved within 72 hrs, injection site pain, photosensitivity, and pink discoloration of skin, urine or feces; AEs attributed to CB included nausea, decreased WBC, and fatigue. Response assessments on 24 injected tumors were: 2 complete response (8%), 7 partial response (29%) and 11 stable disease (46%), per 2D EASL. Among the 4 CB-refractory pts, median overall survival (OS) was 9.2 months (range 5.3 - 11.4 months, with 2 pts alive at 5.3 months each), while among the 11 CB-naïve pts OS was undefined (range 0.5 - 21.9+ months, with 1 death at 7.9 months). Pts receiving PV-10 alone (1 CB-refractory, 2 naïve) achieved a median OS of 7.9 months with one CB-naïve pt alive with partial overall response at 21.9 months. Conclusions: Response indicative of regression or stabilization in a majority (83%) of injected lesions is encouraging in a disease of major unmet need. Enrollment and follow-up for safety, duration of response and survival are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT00986661 .

No abstract