It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Introduction
The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the contouring methods on dose metrics and their predictive value on tumor control and survival, in both situations of pre-treatment and post-treatment dosimetry, for patients with advanced HCC treated with SIRT.
Methods
Forty-eight patients who underwent SIRT between 2012 and 2020 were retrospectively included in this study. Target volumes were delineated using two methods: MRI-based contours manually drawn by a radiologist and then registered on SPECT/CT and PET/CT via deformable registration (Pre-CMRI and Post-CMRI), 99mTc-MAA-SPECT and 90Y-microspheres-PET 10% threshold contouring (Pre-CSPECT and Post-CPET). The mean absorbed dose (Dm) and the minimal absorbed dose delivered to 70% of the tumor volume (D70) were evaluated with both contouring methods; the tumor-to-normal liver uptake ratio (TNR) was evaluated with MRI-based contours only. Tumor response was assessed using the mRECIST criteria on the follow-up MRIs.
Results
No significant differences were found for Dm and TNR between pre- and post-treatment. TNR evaluated with radiologic contours (Pre-CMRI and Post-CMRI) were predictive of tumor control at 6 months on pre- and post-treatment dosimetry (OR 5.9 and 7.1, respectively; p = 0.02 and 0.01). All dose metrics determined with both methods were predictive of overall survival (OS) on pre-treatment dosimetry, but only Dm with MRI-based contours was predictive of OS on post-treatment images with a median of 23 months for patients with a supramedian Dm versus 14 months for the others (p = 0.04).
Conclusion
In advanced HCC treated with SIRT, Dm and TNR determined with radiologic contours were predictive of tumor control and OS. This study shows that a rigorous clinical workflow (radiologic contours + registration on scintigraphic images) is feasible and should be prospectively considered for improving therapeutic strategy.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Centre Georges-François Leclerc, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.418037.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0641 1257)
2 Centre Georges-François Leclerc, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.418037.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0641 1257); University of Burgundy, ImViA Laboratory, IFTIM Team, EA 7535, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.5613.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2298 9313)
3 University Hospital Dijon, Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.31151.37)
4 University of Burgundy, ImViA Laboratory, IFTIM Team, EA 7535, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.5613.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2298 9313)
5 University of Burgundy, ImViA Laboratory, IFTIM Team, EA 7535, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.5613.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2298 9313); University Hospital Dijon, Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.31151.37)
6 University Hospital Dijon, Department of Gastroenterology, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.31151.37)