Advertisement

90Y-radioembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma from a theranostic perspective: towards a personalized approach

  • Luca Filippi
  • Orazio Schillaci
  • Oreste Bagni
Letter to the Editor
  • 65 Downloads

Dear Sir,

We have read with great interest the paper by Ho and colleagues describing the usefulness of dual tracer 11C-acetate and 18F-FDG PET-CT for the individualized dose calculation in patients affected by hepatocellular carcinoma submitted to treatment with 90Y-labeled glass microspheres [1]. We would like to congratulate the authors for this publication and thank them for focusing on a relevant question. The two tracers (i.e., 11C-acetate and 18F-FDG) were proposed as complementary biochemical probes to characterize hepatocellular carcinoma before undergoing the administration of 90Y-labeled glass microspheres, as the more aggressive hepatocellular lesions are generally 18F-FDG-avid, while the more differentiated ones can be visualized using 11C-acetate.

A growing amount of scientific data concerning 90Y-radioembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma has demonstrated its significant impact on outcomes [2]. To date, 90Y-radioembolization represents a well-standardized procedure in...

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Luca Filippi, Orazio Schillaci, and Oreste Bagni declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Not applicable, this is a Letter to the Editor.

References

  1. 1.
    Ho CL, Chen S, Cheung SK, et al. Radioembolization with 90Y glass microspheres for hepatocellular carcinoma: significance of pretreatment 11C-acetate and 18F-FDG PET/CT and posttreatment 90Y PET/CT in individualized dose prescription. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4064-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Kulik L, Wang E, Riaz A, Ryu RK, et al. Radioembolization results in longer time-to-progression and reduced toxicity compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2011;140(2):497–507.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahmadzadehfar H, Essler M. It is time to move forward into the era of Theranostics. EJNMMI Res. 2018;8(1):9  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-018-0364-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haug AR. Imaging of primary liver tumors with positron-emission tomography. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;61(3):292–300  https://doi.org/10.23736/S1824-4785.17.02994-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ma W, Jia J, Wang S, Bai W, Yi J, Bai M, et al. The prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT for hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Theranostics. 2014;4(7):736–44.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Filippi L, Di Costanzo GG, D'Agostini A, Tortora R, Pelle G, Cianni R, et al. Decrease in total lesion glycolysis and survival after yttrium-90-radioembolization in poorly differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumour thrombosis. Nucl Med Commun. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000000879.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nuclear Medicine Unit“Santa Maria Goretti” HospitalLatinaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Biomedicine and PreventionUniversity Tor VergataRomeItaly
  3. 3.IRCCS NeuromedPozzilliItaly

Personalised recommendations