2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.12.1221
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Correlation of Technetium-99m Macroaggregated Albumin and Yttrium-90 Glass Microsphere Biodistribution in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Retrospective Review of Pretreatment Single Photon Emission CT and Posttreatment Positron Emission Tomography/CT

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

4
63
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 79 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
4
63
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is therefore not surprising that previous work has shown mixed results on the performance of planning tumor dosimetry based on MAA. 16,20 In terms of dosimetry models, PM offers improvement over the package insert dosimetry for glass microspheres by extracting doses separately for tumor and NL volumes. But PM can still lead to significant deviations in dose estimates in many cases due to (a) the implicit assumption that microsphere distributions are uniform in the tumor and NL compartments, (b) the uncertainty in determining the tumor to NL uptake ratio (TNR) required for PM calculations, and (c) its inability to address multiple tumors with different sizes and/or uptake.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is therefore not surprising that previous work has shown mixed results on the performance of planning tumor dosimetry based on MAA. 16,20 In terms of dosimetry models, PM offers improvement over the package insert dosimetry for glass microspheres by extracting doses separately for tumor and NL volumes. But PM can still lead to significant deviations in dose estimates in many cases due to (a) the implicit assumption that microsphere distributions are uniform in the tumor and NL compartments, (b) the uncertainty in determining the tumor to NL uptake ratio (TNR) required for PM calculations, and (c) its inability to address multiple tumors with different sizes and/or uptake.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although we demonstrated that the ECM porosity of the THLE-3/ TIME (healthy liver) microenvironment is higher than the ECM porosity of both cancer microenvironments, the particle accumulation rate in the MDA-MB-231/TIME and C3Asub28/TIME microenvironments are 3.45-and 4.81-fold (P < 0.05) higher than the healthy liver microenvironment, respectively. Similarly, a recent clinical study on drug delivery indicated that uptake by tumorigenic portions of the liver is significantly higher than healthy portions (Haste et al, 2017). This indicates that vessel porosity plays a more dominant role compared with ECM porosity in the accumulation rates of particles in the ECM.…”
mentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Radioembolization (RE) via Yttrium‐90 ( 90 Y) microspheres enables selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) for hepatic malignancies. Guidelines exist for the careful planning of the RE procedure, specifically with the use of pretreatment angiograms and Technetium‐99m labeled macroaggregated albumin ( 99m Tc‐MAA) single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for calculating lung shunt fraction and predicting extrahepatic flow . However, these images are often imprecise simulators of actual microsphere distribution and poor predictors of individual lesion response in patients with metastatic disease, such as colorectal cancer .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Guidelines exist for the careful planning of the RE procedure, specifically with the use of pretreatment angiograms and Technetium-99m labeled macroaggregated albumin ( 99m Tc-MAA) single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for calculating lung shunt fraction and predicting extrahepatic flow. 1,2 However, these images are often imprecise simulators of actual microsphere distribution and poor predictors of individual lesion response in patients with metastatic disease, such as colorectal cancer. 3 Possible reasons for these discrepancies include differences in sizes and in the range of sizes between the 99m Tc-MAA particles (~5-100 lm diameter) and 90 Y microspheres (~20-30 lm diameter) and the delay between pretreatment imaging and radioembolization (~2 weeks).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%