Ablation of Small Liver Metastases Presenting as Foci of Diffusion Restriction on MRI-Results from the Prospective Minimally Invasive Thermal Ablation (MITA) Study.

PURPOSE: Liver metastases presenting as small hyperintense foci on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) pose a therapeutic challenge. Ablation is generally not possible since these lesions are often occult on ultrasound and CT. The purpose of this prospective study was to assess if small liver metastases (≤10 mm) detected on DWI can be successfully localized and ablated with the Hepatic Arteriography and C-Arm CT-Guided Ablation technique (HepACAGA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients with small liver metastases (≤10 mm), as measured on DWI, referred for ablation with HepACAGA between 1 January 2021, and 31 October 2023, were included. Re-ablations and ablations concomitant with another local treatment were excluded. The primary outcome was the technical success rate, defined as the intraprocedural detection and subsequent successful ablation of small liver metastases using HepACAGA. Secondary outcomes included the primary and secondary local tumor progression (LTP) rates and the complication rate. RESULTS: A total of 15 patients (26 tumors) were included, with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (73%), neuro-endocrine tumors (15%), breast cancer (8%) and esophageal cancer (4%). All 26 tumors were successfully identified, punctured and ablated (a technical success rate of 100%). After a median follow-up of 9 months, primary and secondary LTP were 4% and 0%, respectively. No complications occurred. CONCLUSION: In this proof-of-concept study, the HepACAGA technique was successfully used to detect and ablate 100% of small liver metastases identified on DWI with a low recurrence rate and no complications. This technique enables the ablation of subcentimeter liver metastases detected on MRI.

Conventional versus Hepatic Arteriography and C-Arm CT-Guided Ablation of Liver Tumors (HepACAGA): A Comparative Analysis.

PURPOSE: Hepatic Arteriography and C-Arm CT-Guided Ablation of liver tumors (HepACAGA) is a novel technique, combining hepatic-arterial contrast injection with C-arm CT-guided navigation. This study compared the outcomes of the HepACAGA technique with patients treated with conventional ultrasound (US) and/or CT-guided ablation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all consecutive patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) treated with conventional US-/CT-guided ablation between 1 January 2015, and 31 December 2020, and patients treated with HepACAGA between 1 January 2021, and 31 October 2023, were included. The primary outcome was local tumor recurrence-free survival (LTRFS). Secondary outcomes included the local tumor recurrence (LTR) rate and complication rate. RESULTS: 68 patients (120 tumors) were included in the HepACAGA cohort and 53 patients (78 tumors) were included in the conventional cohort. In both cohorts, HCC was the predominant tumor type (63% and 73%, respectively). In the HepACAGA cohort, all patients received microwave ablation. Radiofrequency ablation was the main ablation technique in the conventional group (78%). LTRFS was significantly longer for patients treated with the HepACAGA technique (p = 0.015). Both LTR and the complication rate were significantly lower in the HepACAGA cohort compared to the conventional cohort (LTR 5% vs. 26%, respectively; p < 0.001) (complication rate 4% vs. 15%, respectively; p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the HepACAGA technique was safer and more effective than conventional ablation for HCC and CRLM, resulting in lower rates of local tumor recurrence, longer local tumor recurrence-free survival and fewer procedure-related complications.

Lung Mean Dose Prediction in Transarterial Radioembolization (TARE): Superiority of [166Ho]-Scout Over [99mTc]MAA in a Prospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Radiation pneumonitis is a serious complication of radioembolization. In holmium-166 ([166Ho]) radioembolization, the lung mean dose (LMD) can be estimated (eLMD) using a scout dose with either technetium-99 m-macroaggregated albumin ([99mTc]MAA) or [166Ho]-microspheres. The accuracy of eLMD based on [99mTc]MAA (eLMDMAA) was compared to eLMD based on [166Ho]-scout dose (eLMDHo-scout) in two prospective clinical studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were included if they received both scout doses ([99mTc]MAA and [166Ho]-scout), had a posttreatment [166Ho]-SPECT/CT (gold standard) and were scanned on the same hybrid SPECT/CT system. The correlation between eLMDMAA/eLMDHo-scout and LMDHo-treatment was assessed by Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r). Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to analyze paired data. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with unresectable liver metastases were included. During follow-up, none developed symptoms of radiation pneumonitis. Median eLMDMAA (1.53 Gy, range 0.09-21.33 Gy) was significantly higher than median LMDHo-treatment (0.00 Gy, range 0.00-1.20 Gy; p < 0.01). Median eLMDHo-scout (median 0.00 Gy, range 0.00-1.21 Gy) was not significantly different compared to LMDHo-treatment (p > 0.05). In all cases, eLMDMAA was higher than LMDHo-treatment (p < 0.01). While a significant correlation was found between eLMDHo-scout and LMDHo-treatment (r = 0.43, p < 0.01), there was no correlation between eLMDMAA and LMDHo-treatment (r = 0.02, p = 0.90). CONCLUSION: [166Ho]-scout dose is superior in predicting LMD over [99mTc]MAA, in [166Ho]-radioembolization. Consequently, [166Ho]-scout may limit unnecessary patient exclusions and avoid unnecessary therapeutic activity reductions in patients eligible for radioembolization. TRAIL REGISTRATION: NCT01031784, registered December 2009. NCT01612325, registered June 2012.

Harnessing the Potential of Real-World Evidence in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

OPINION STATEMENT: Treatment guidelines for colorectal cancer (CRC) are primarily based on the results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), the gold standard methodology to evaluate safety and efficacy of oncological treatments. However, generalizability of trial results is often limited due to stringent eligibility criteria, underrepresentation of specific populations, and more heterogeneity in clinical practice. This may result in an efficacy-effectiveness gap and uncertainty regarding meaningful benefit versus treatment harm. Meanwhile, conduct of traditional RCTs has become increasingly challenging due to identification of a growing number of (small) molecular subtypes. These challenges-combined with the digitalization of health records-have led to growing interest in use of real-world data (RWD) to complement evidence from RCTs. RWD is used to evaluate epidemiological trends, quality of care, treatment effectiveness, long-term (rare) safety, and quality of life (QoL) measures. In addition, RWD is increasingly considered in decision-making by clinicians, regulators, and payers. In this narrative review, we elaborate on these applications in CRC, and provide illustrative examples. As long as the quality of RWD is safeguarded, ongoing developments, such as common data models, federated learning, and predictive modelling, will further unfold its potential. First, whenever possible, we recommend conducting pragmatic trials, such as registry-based RCTs, to optimize generalizability and answer clinical questions that are not addressed in registrational trials. Second, we argue that marketing approval should be conditional for patients who would have been ineligible for the registrational trial, awaiting planned (non) randomized evaluation of outcomes in the real world. Third, high-quality effectiveness results should be incorporated in treatment guidelines to aid in patient counseling. We believe that a coordinated effort from all stakeholders is essential to improve the quality of RWD, create a learning healthcare system with optimal use of trials and real-world evidence (RWE), and ultimately ensure personalized care for every CRC patient.